Campus Master Plan
2004-2015
December 2004
Campus Master Plan
2004-2015
Prepared By:
Oregon State University
Facilities Services
100 Adams Hall
Corvallis, Oregon 97331-2001
Jim Lloyd, Director of Facilities Services
Vincent Martorello, Campus Planning Manager
Patty McIntosh, Senior Space Planner
Dan VanVliet, Mapping Coordinator
Carolyn Munford, Planning Analyst
December 2004
Acknowledgements
Oregon State University (OSU) would like to acknowledge the following parties for their contribution to
the Campus Master Plan (CMP).
City of Corvallis City Council, City Manager and City Attorney
Helen Berg, Mayor
Vicki McRoberts, Ward 1
Tina Empol, Ward 2
George Grosch, Ward 3
Jackson Cassady, Ward 4
Rob Gándara, Ward 5
Scott Wershow, Ward 6
Scott Zombrick, Ward 7
Betty Griffiths, Ward 8
Hal Brauner, Ward 9
Jon Nelson, City Manager
Jim Brewer, City Attorney
City of Corvallis Planning Commission
Ed Barlow-Pieterick, Chair
Bill York, Vice Chair
Kirk Bailey
David Connell
Tracy Daugherty
Jane Fleischbein
David Graetz
Tony Howell
Bruce Orsen
City of Corvallis Community Development Staff
Ken Gibb, Community Development Department Director
Kelly Schlesener, Planning Division Manager
Fred Towne, Senior Planner
City of Corvallis Public Works Staff
Steve Rogers, Department Director
Keith Turner, Development Engineering Supervisor
Josh Bjornstedt
OSU Neighbors
Special thanks are in order for a group of neighbors that helped to prepare the final version of the CMP to
ensure neighborhood concerns were addressed.
Dan Brown
Gary Angelo
Tammy Stehr
Carol Chin
Trish Daniels
Jim Washburn
Andrew Ross
Richard Towey
Joan Sandeno
Robert Mason
John Foster
OSU Facilities Services Staff and Consultants
Facilities Services Design and Construction
Facilities Services Site Operations
Facilities Services Environmental Health and Safety
Facilities Services Administration
Ms. Terri Harding, Satre Associates
Mr. Thomas Bauer, PTVAmerica
Mr. Tom Armstrong, Winterbook Planning
Keyword Technical Writing and Editing
Table of Contents
Table of Contents
Chapter 1 – Introduction
1.0 Introduction
1.1 Campus Master Plan Purpose and Overview
1.2 OSU Mission Statement
1.3 Campus Character
1.4 OSU History
1.5 OSU Campus Planning History
1.6 CMP Plan Objectives
1.7 CMP Planning Process
1.8 Organization of the Campus Master Plan
1-1
1-1
1-3
1-5
1-14
1-17
1-21
1-22
1-23
Chapter 2 – CMP Principles and Policies
2.0 Campus Master Plan Principles and Policies
2.1 Community Relationships
2.2 Academic and Research Excellence
2.3 Student Life and Services
2.4 Athletics
2.5 Site Development, Operations, and Management
2.6 Transportation, Circulation, and Parking
2.7 Pedestrian Systems and Open Space
2.8 Environmental Stewardship and Natural Features
2.9 Lighting and Site Furnishings
2.10 Utility Infrastructure
2-1
2-1
2-3
2-4
2-5
2-5
2-7
2-8
2-9
2-13
2-14
Chapter 3 – Projected Facility Needs
3.0 Projected Facility Needs
3.1 OSU Population Projections
3.2 Campus Overview
3.3 Existing Facilities
3.4 Future Growth
3.5 Condition of Facilities
3.6 Capital Construction
3-1
3-1
3-3
3-4
3-9
3-13
3-14
Chapter 4 – Campus Development
4.0 Campus Development
4.1 General Development Policies
4.2 Sector Descriptions
Sector A – West 35th
Sector B – West Campus
Sector C – Campus Core
Sector D – Lower Campus
Sector E – Southwest Campus
Campus Master Plan
4-1
4-5
4-9
4-9
4-13
4-17
4-21
4-24
i
Table of Contents
Chapter 4 – Campus Development, continued
Sector F – Reser Stadium and Gill Coliseum
Sector G – LaSells and Alumni Center
Sector H – Far South Campus
Sector J – South Farm
4-28
4-32
4-35
4-37
Chapter 5 – Design Guidelines
5.0 Design Guidelines Overview
5.1 The Design Process
5.2 Design Guidelines
5-1
5-2
5-4
Chapter 6 – Transportation Plan
6.0 Transportation Plan
6.1 Transportation Policies
6.2 Transportation System
6.3 Transportation Impacts
6.4 Travel Survey
6.5 Base Transportation Model
6.6 Development Scenario Impact on Level of Service
6.7 Pedestrian and Bicycle Systems
6.8 Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP)
6.9 Transportation Demand Management Scenarios
6.10 Transit Systems
6-1
6-1
6-3
6-7
6-7
6-12
6-16
6-20
6-24
6-34
6-38
Chapter 7 – Parking Plan
7.0 Parking Plan
7.1 Purpose of the Parking Plan
7.2 Parking Policies
7.3 Parking Plan Development
7.4 Current Parking Inventory
7.5 Current Parking Management Program
7.6 Off-Campus Parking Enforcement
7.7 Recommended Action Plan for Off-Campus Parking Management
7.8 Parking Demand Assessment
7.9 Parking and Alternative Transportation
7.10 Bicycle Parking
7.11 Bicycle Action Plan
7-1
7-1
7-1
7-3
7-5
7-7
7-10
7-13
7-14
7-17
7-17
7-19
Chapter 8 – Implementation of the CMP
8.0 Implementation of the CMP
ii
8-1
Campus Master Plan
Table of Contents
List of Tables
Chapter 2 – CMP Principles and Policies
Table 2.1 City-Inventoried Natural Features on OSU Property
2-10
Chapter 3 – Projected Facility Needs
Table 3.1 Historical Student Enrollment
Table 3.2 Projected Student Enrollment
Table 3.3 Projected Increase in OSU Student Enrollment and Faculty/Staff
Table 3.4 Average Age of Buildings within Each Sector
Table 3.5 Space Assignment by Use Category
Table 3.6 Historic Buildings Listed with the City and OUS
Table 3.7 Student Housing Facilities
Table 3.8 Assignable Square Footage by Growth
Table 3.9 Existing Assignable Percent Square Footage by Sector
Table 3.10 Most Likely Scenario by Assignable Square Footage
Table 3.11 Full Build-Out Scenario by Assignable Square Footage
3-1
3-2
3-2
3-4
3-4
3-6
3-8
3-10
3-11
3-11
3-12
Chapter 4 – Campus Development
Table 4.1 Building Square Footage by Sector
Table 4.2 Open Space Requirement by Sector
Table 4.3 Total Master Plan Area
Table 4.4 Sector A Area Calculations
Table 4.5 Sector B Area Calculations
Table 4.6 Sector C Area Calculations
Table 4.7 Sector D Area Calculations
Table 4.8 Sector E Area Calculations
Table 4.9 Sector F Area Calculations
Table 4.10 Sector G Area Calculations
Table 4.11 Sector H Area Calculations
Table 4.12 Sector J Area Calculations
4-1
4-2
4-5
4-9
4-13
4-17
4-21
4-24
4-28
4-32
4-35
4-37
Chapter 6 – Transportation Plan
Table 6.1 Mode Shares for Travel From/To Campus
Table 6.2 Mode Shares for Intra-Campus Travel
Table 6.3 Historical Mode Share Information
Table 6.4 Uses with Assignable Square Footage
Table 6.5 Growth and Assignable Square Footage by Scenario
Table 6.6 Existing Level of Service
Table 6.7 Level of Service by Development Scenario
Table 6.8 Transportation Improvements by Sector
Table 6.9 Development Triggers Related to Allocated Buildable Square Footages
Campus Master Plan
6-10
6-10
6-10
6-12
6-12
6-13
6-16
6-26
6-32
iii
Table of Contents
Chapter 6 – Transportation Plan, continued
Table 6.10 Transportation Demand Management Scenarios
Table 6.11 Trips Generated By TDM Scenarios
Table 6.12 Percentage Increases of Trips Above Current Levels by TDM Scenarios
Table 6.13 Corvallis Transit Bus System Scheduled Stops at OSU
Table 6.14 OSU Shuttle Ridership
6-35
6-36
6-37
6-38
6-39
Chapter 7 – Parking Plan
Table 7.1 Available Parking Spaces by Lot Type
Table 7.2 Parking Usage by Lot Type
Table 7.3 Headcount and Parking Summary
Table 7.4 Parking Usage by Sector
Table 7.5 Parking Permits Issued and Cost Per Year
Table 7.6 Shuttle Ridership by Term and Academic Year
Table 7.7 On-Campus Parking Enforcement Citations
Table 7.8 Neighborhood Parking Usage
Table 7.9 District A, Neighborhood Parking Usage by Time Period
Table 7.10 District B, Neighborhood Parking Usage by Time Period
Table 7.11 Historical Parking Demand
Table 7.12 Population Increase
Table 7.13 Future Parking Demand
Table 7.14 Covered and Uncovered Bike Parking, 2003
7-5
7-5
7-6
7-6
7-8
7-9
7-10
7-10
7-12
7-12
7-14
7-16
7-16
7-17
Chapter 8 – Implementation of the CMP
Table 8.1 LDC Table 3.36-1 Privately Owned Parcels
Table 8.2 LDC Table 3.36-2 Building Square Footage by Sector
Table 8.3 LDC Table 3.36-3 Minimum Future Open Space by Sector
Table 8.4 LDC Table 3.36-4 Maximum Building Height by Sector
Table 8.5 LDC Table 3.36-5 Residential Use Zoning Standards
iv
8-4
8-10
8-11
8-12
8-24
Campus Master Plan
Table of Contents
List of Figures
Chapter 1 – Introduction
Figure 1.1 OSU Campus Sector Map
Figure 1.2 OSU Memorial Union Quad, circa 1945
Figure 1.3 Lower Campus
Figure 1.4 Agricultural and Life Sciences Building
Figure 1.5 OSU Vicinity Street Map
Figure 1.6 Parking Facilities
Figure 1.7 OSU Buildings
Figure 1.8 Pedestrian Corridors and Open Space
Figure 1.9 Women Students at Oregon Agricultural College, circa 1898
Figure 1.10 OSU Campus, circa 1911
Figure 1.11 Education Hall, circa 1912
Figure 1.12 Memorial Union Construction, circa 1927
Figure 1.13 Aerial View of OSU, early 1930s
Figure 1.14 1909 Olmsted Brothers Plan
Figure 1.15 1926 Physical Development Plan
Figure 1.16 1945 Physical Development Plan
Figure 1.17 1964 Physical Development Plan
Figure 1.18 1976 Physical Development Plan
Figure 1.19 1986 Physical Development Plan
Figure 1.20 2004-2015 Campus Master Plan
Figure 1.21 Aerial Map of OSU with Sector Boundary
Cover
1-3
1-4
1-5
1-7
1-9
1-11
1-13
1-14
1-15
1-15
1-15
1-16
1-17
1-18
1-18
1-19
1-19
1-20
1-20
1-25
Chapter 2 – CMP Principles and Policies
Figure 2.1 CMP Input Sources
Figure 2.2 Linus Pauling, 1922 OSU Graduate and Recipient of the 1954
Nobel Prize for Chemistry and 1962 Nobel Peace Prize
Figure 2.3 OSU Football Player
Figure 2.4 Architectural Design for Renovation of Weatherford Hall, 2003
Figure 2.5 Northwest View from the Valley Library
Figure 2.6 Historic Light Fixture
Cover
2-3
2-5
2-5
2-8
2-13
Chapter 3 – Projected Facility Needs
Figure 3.1 Halsell Hall
Figure 3.2 OSU Historic Buildings
3-3
3-5
Chapter 4 – Campus Development
Figure 4.1 Aerial View of OSU
Figure 4.2 OSU Campus Sector Map
Figure 4.3 Irish Bend Covered Bridge
Figure 4.4 Map of Sector A
Figure 4.5 Map of Sector B
Campus Master Plan
4-3
4-4
4-7
4-8
4-12
v
Table of Contents
Chapter 4 – Campus Development, continued
Figure 4.6 Peavy Field
Figure 4.7 Map of Sector C
Figure 4.8 OSU’s Oldest Building, Benton Hall, Built in 1889
Figure 4.9 Map of Sector D
Figure 4.10 Map of Sector E
Figure 4.11 Richardson Hall
Figure 4.12 Map of Sector F
Figure 4.13 Reser Stadium on a Football Game Day
Figure 4.14 Map of Sector G
Figure 4.15 Map of Sector H
Figure 4.16 Map of Sector J
4-15
4-16
4-19
4-20
4-23
4-26
4-27
4-30
4-31
4-34
4-36
Chapter 5 – Design Guidelines
Figure 5.1 Waldo Hall
Figure 5.2 Madison and 11th Street
Figure 5.3 Pedestrian Access to Core Campus
Figure 5.4 Valley Library Rotunda
5-1
5-5
5-7
5-10
Chapter 6 – Transportation Plan
Figure 6.1 Functional Classification System
Figure 6.2 OSU Street Ownership (Private Streets)
Figure 6.3 Transportation Analysis Zones
Figure 6.4 Existing Bicycle Improvements
6-4
6-6
6-15
6-22
Chapter 7 – Parking Plan
Figure 7.1 Existing Parking Facilities
Figure 7.2 City Parking Districts
Figure 7.3 Future Parking Locations
Figure 7.4 Existing Bicycle Parking Facilities
7-4
7-11
7-15
7-18
Chapter 8 – Implementation
Figure 8.1 Aerial View of OSU with OSU District Boundary
Figure 8.2 Campus Sector Map
Figure 8.3 Neighborhood Transition Area
vi
8-1
8-9
8-12
Campus Master Plan
Campus Master Plan
2004-2015
Chapter 1 - Introduction
Figure 1.1: OSU Campus Sector Map
Introduction
1.0 Introduction
1.1
Campus Master Plan Purpose and Overview
Oregon State University (OSU) is a comprehensive public research university and a member of
the Oregon University System (OUS). As the state’s land-, sea-, and space-grant institution, OSU
has programs and faculty located in every county of the state. OSU views the state of Oregon as
its campus, and works in partnership with Oregon community colleges and other OUS
institutions to provide access to educational programs.
The OSU Campus Master Plan (CMP) focuses on the 570 acres of land recognized as the main
campus within the city limits of Corvallis, Oregon. This acreage is situated west of downtown
Corvallis and bounded, generally, by 9th Street to the east, Monroe Street to the north, Western
Boulevard to the south, and 35th Street to the west.
The CMP has three purposes:
•
Identify guiding principles and policies for the long-range planning of OSU that will direct
the physical development (i.e., approximately three million gross square feet of new
buildings and facilities) over the approximate 10- to 12-year planning horizon.
•
Establish a conceptual framework for the campus through program development, land use
determinations, intensity of development, and parking and circulation initiatives.
•
Clarify and enhance the relationship and connectivity with the surrounding community.
The CMP was formulated to maintain and enhance the university’s fundamental mission, its
roles in undergraduate, graduate, and professional education, and its public service. The growth
proposed in the CMP is necessary to accommodate the projected growth in the number of people
seeking higher education and to support educational and research initiatives. The CMP offers
flexibility in meeting the challenge of providing a compelling learning environment, while
setting standards that direct future growth, guide future design decisions, and conserve and
enhance the open space of the campus. In balancing these various concerns, the university truly
becomes a public amenity for all in the state of Oregon.
The CMP updates the 1986 OSU Physical Development Plan and aims to meet the needs for the
intellectual, economic, technological, and social advancement of the campus and surrounding
community. The CMP is based on the contributions of administrators, faculty, staff, students, and
the Corvallis community.
Campus Master Plan
1-1
Introduction
To guide future development and expansion of the campus, the CMP:
•
Divides the campus into nine sectors, each with its own development allocation (amount of
building square footage allowed) and development standards;
•
Identifies the campus core (Sector C) as the primary area for academic and associated
research-related facilities;
•
Establishes the concept of grouping student academic activities within a 10-minute walk to
minimize the need for automobile travel between classes;
•
Anticipates approximately 750,000 gross square feet of new construction in the campus core
area with an additional 2.4 million gross square feet in the other sectors most likely to occur
over the CMP’s 10- to 12-year planning horizon;
•
Proposes a review framework that allows for city administrative approval if development is
consistent with the development allocation, sector standards, and mitigation strategies;
•
Recognizes that the core area will become denser (in terms of building mass and pedestrian
activity), thereby displacing some parking adjacent to buildings;
•
Locates displaced and new parking facilities in new lots and structures, but not necessarily
adjacent to new development;
•
Provides areas for additional student housing facilities;
•
Identifies major campus entryways (portals) at Jefferson Avenue and/or Monroe Avenue and
Western Avenue and 26th Street;
•
Maintains the open space character of the campus by minimizing the amount of development
in the lower campus, which is the area from 11th to 14th streets in the vicinity of Monroe
Avenue. Development from 9th to 11th streets shall be for uses such as a welcome center,
president’s residence, additional student housing, and/or other uses that retain the open space
character of the area; and
•
Preserves the existing quads, proposes construction of new quads with new development, and
respects the values associated with Oak Creek and other natural resource areas.
The CMP recognizes the need for facilities and services to support the academic and research
communities of OSU. Through the implementation of the CMP, the university will respond to
the intellectual, economic, and technological advancement needs of the campus community
while visually and physically reinforcing the campus organization and unity.
1-2
Campus Master Plan
Introduction
1.2
OSU Mission Statement
OSU aspires to stimulate a lasting attitude of inquiry, openness, and social responsibility. To
meet these aspirations, OSU is committed to providing excellent academic programs, educational
experiences, and creative scholarship.
OSU is well positioned to contribute to the civic,
economic, environmental, and social foundations of
society, and particularly to help energize Oregon’s
economy and improve the lives of its citizens.
OSU’s vision is to best serve the people of Oregon
and to be among the top 10 land-grant institutions in
United States. To achieve this vision, OSU will be
true to its core values of accountability, diversity,
integrity, respect, and social responsibility while
creating an environment that facilitates further
success.
Figure 1.2: OSU Memorial Union Quad, circa 1945
a.
Core Values
1. Accountability
OSU is a committed steward of the loyalty and good will of alumni and friends and of the
human, fiscal, and physical resources to which it is entrusted.
2. Diversity
OSU recognizes that diversity and excellence go hand-in-hand, enhancing teaching, scholarship,
and service as well as the ability to welcome, respect, and interact with people.
3. Integrity
OSU practices honesty, freedom, truth, and integrity.
4. Respect
OSU treats all persons with civility, dignity, and respect.
5. Social Responsibility
OSU contributes to society’s intellectual, cultural, spiritual, and economic progress and wellbeing to the maximum possible extent.
Campus Master Plan
1-3
Introduction
b.
Achieving the Vision
Achievement of OSU’s vision means that:
•
OSU students are among the best in the nation in their ability to think broadly, address and
solve complex problems, adapt to environments enriched by diversity and characterized by
continuous change, work effectively in an international culture, compete successfully in their
professional areas, and assume leadership roles in their communities;
•
OSU faculty will be increasingly recognized throughout the world for their teaching,
scholarship, research and outreach activities, their pursuit of academic and intellectual
leadership, and integrity;
•
OSU staff will excel in providing the professional and support services without which the
university cannot reach its vision; and
•
The people of Oregon and beyond will enjoy a higher quality of life built upon a balanced
and growing economy, opportunities for its workforce, preservation of the environment, and
the social well-being of its population.
Figure 1.3: Lower Campus
1-4
Campus Master Plan
Introduction
Figure 1.4: Agricultural and Life Sciences Building
1.3
Campus Character
The character of OSU’s campus is defined by a composite of elements including:
•
•
•
•
Streets
Parking
Buildings
Pedestrian corridors and open spaces
These separate but interrelated elements are integrated into the campus and form the framework
for new development. Any new construction or development shall become an extension of these
elements and continue to shape and define the physical character of OSU.
a.
Streets
The campus is based on a grid pattern, which has its roots in the 1909 Olmsted Brothers plan
(see section 1.5). The grid provides an easily understandable development pattern in which open
space and pedestrian areas can be incorporated. Vehicular through-traffic is restricted from most
areas of the campus core. The streets in the core areas are reserved for public transit, bicycle,
pedestrians, and service and emergency vehicle access. The pedestrian-oriented zone allows for
safe and convenient pedestrian movement and enhances the character of the campus.
Campus Master Plan
1-5
Introduction
Some streets through campus remain open to public access and provide for vehicular traffic to
parking and to service destinations. Although these streets currently do not conflict with
pedestrian usage, there may be a need to restrict public access through campus.
An information booth currently located in the parking lot on the north side of Jefferson Avenue
and east of 15th Street provides visitors with campus directions and parking information. This
CMP is intended, in part, to help improve the entryways and way-finding on campus. Major
portals are proposed at the Jefferson Avenue and/or Monroe Avenue area as well as at 26th Street
and Western Boulevard area. Development of these areas will further strengthen the sense of
arrival on the OSU campus. These improvements will also provide a more convenient location
for information dissemination.
The completed Highway 20/34 bypass of downtown Corvallis provides regional traffic
connectivity between Interstate 5 and the coastal area. This route reduces traffic through
downtown Corvallis and directs travelers destined for campus to the south campus entries, which
results in increased traffic on 15th and 26th streets.
1-6
Campus Master Plan
Introduction
Figure 1.5: OSU Vicinity Street Map
Campus Master Plan
1-7
Introduction
b.
Parking
Most of the campus parking spaces are located on the campus perimeter. The university has 58
acres of parking, which provides spaces for approximately 7,714 cars on campus. Of those
spaces, over 1,000 are located in the Reser Stadium (Sector F) area. The greatest demand for
parking, however, is in areas closer to the campus core where most academic facilities are
concentrated; these areas also share the greatest demand for new and expanded facilities. Thus it
is anticipated that some core parking areas will be redeveloped with new buildings, further
displacing parking to perimeter locations.
Over the last decade OSU and the city have encouraged the use of alternative modes of
transportation, particularly bicycle travel. Approximately 5,800 bicycle parking spaces are
available on campus, one-third of which are covered. The spaces are distributed throughout the
campus near all major destinations. Recently, some construction projects have included shower
and locker facilities to further promote bicycle travel.
Bus ridership to the campus has increased dramatically due to a pre-paid ride program. This
program allows faculty, staff, and students to ride the Corvallis Transit System bus upon
showing a valid OSU identification card. Recently, rising enrollment and the increasing
propensity of students to drive their cars to campus have increased the parking demand on
campus. To meet this parking demand and mitigate the impact on local residents, a campus
shuttle service was implemented in January 2000, thus allowing improved accessibility to
peripheral parking facilities such as those at Reser Stadium.
Additionally, OSU is working with local transit authorities to institute a Transportation Demand
Management strategy to encourage alternative methods of commuting. This includes promoting
carpools and vanpools, bicycling, walking, telecommuting, and alternative work hours, among
other strategies.
If the driving habits and trends of the OSU population continue at their current rate, the parking
demand will require construction of new parking facilities. It is OSU’s desire, as well as a local
zoning requirement, to provide adequate on-site parking. To the extent possible, OSU seeks to
encourage those who bring their vehicles to campus to park in OSU-provided facilities and not
park in the surrounding neighborhoods. To the extent that students, faculty, and staff create
parking problems in the surrounding neighborhoods, strategies may be needed to mitigate offcampus impacts.
1-8
Campus Master Plan
Introduction
Figure 1.6: Parking Facilities
Campus Master Plan
1-9
Introduction
c.
Buildings
The OSU campus consists of a wide range of building styles and types that reflect their
functions, the attitudes of university administrators, and the popular styles at the time of building
construction. The original buildings developed along the sloping land west of 15th Street were,
for the most part, organized on a northeast/southwest axis corresponding to 14th and 15th streets.
These buildings vary greatly in size and form, but all have strong stone bases and distinctive
visual qualities.
The first campus master plan, prepared by the Olmsted Brothers firm in 1909, created a new
planning order and attitude about landscape and architecture that emphasized the importance of
trees and architectural harmony on campus. The Olmsted document stated that buildings should
be of uniform brick materials and of basic classical forms with dignified entrances. Buildings
should be oriented along tree-lined streets, facing broad open spaces so that each building could
be fully appreciated. The Olmsted plan also called for landscapes of open lawn and clustered
trees to minimize obstruction of the building facades.
While historic building patterns and styles continued to be recognized and appreciated, buildings
constructed after 1945 shared little continuity in architectural character. The modern movement
in architecture dominated this period, resulting in the emergence of widely varied building
forms. The use of brick remained a common element in many buildings, but the Olmsted
Brothers’ concerns about modest building masses and a building’s relationship to open space and
the street grid system were often disregarded. Idiosyncratic materials and configurations were
used. A disregard for mass and scale placed undue attention on some buildings and overpowered
the modest scale of older buildings.
Future development should ensure that buildings visually and physically reinforce campus
organization and unity. Buildings help define the boundaries of streets and open spaces and
establish a campus identity. The university should strive to preserve historically significant
buildings, ensure that new buildings are compatible with the overall campus context, and
maintain and enhance the existing pattern of development.
1-10
Campus Master Plan
Introduction
Figure 1.7: OSU Buildings
Campus Master Plan
1-11
Introduction
d.
Pedestrian Corridors and Open Spaces
Pedestrian walkways form critical links between buildings, reinforce the circulation grid, and
connect campus open spaces. The network of walkways and quads forms the primary circulation
system for the university community. The decision in the early 1960s to bar vehicular throughtraffic from the campus core expanded the available space for pedestrians and created a safe and
more relaxed atmosphere during peak pedestrian-use periods.
Walkways tend to be formal and angular, forming direct lines between destinations. This
formality builds on the traditional street grid and building patterns. The Memorial Union
Quadrangle is the largest geometric pattern on campus, and is consistent with the classical nature
of the surrounding buildings.
Open spaces throughout campus are dominated by large expanses of lawn with clusters of trees
and impressive shrub beds typically located at the foundations of buildings. When the state’s
nursery industry began to flourish in the 1950s, considerable emphasis was placed on campus
shrub plantings. OSU became a demonstration garden for many species and hybrids that were
being propagated by its Horticulture Department.
A part of this CMP is devoted to increasing the number of open spaces on campus by introducing
public plazas and courtyards. These functional hardscape areas will become an extension of
buildings and provide the OSU community with another form of communal space.
Today, OSU’s campus reflects a rich tradition of street tree planting. The campus core in
particular is dominated by a large number of American elms. The threat of tree loss from Dutch
elm disease led to a program of removal and replacement during the 1960s and 1970s. This
program was abandoned in the 1980s, and today these trees are routinely maintained and
monitored for Dutch elm disease. It is important to continue a careful program of protection and
disease prevention to maintain this vital historic resource.
1-12
Campus Master Plan
Introduction
Figure 1.8: Pedestrian Corridors and Open Spaces
Campus Master Plan
1-13
Introduction
1.4
OSU History
In 1868, the Oregon Legislative Assembly designated Corvallis College as the Agricultural
College of the State of Oregon. The college was the recipient of land-grant fund income from the
sale of 90,000 acres in southwest Oregon. The Corvallis College Board of Trustees accepted the
designation and permanent adoption of Corvallis College as the state’s agricultural college in
1870. The name of the institution was Corvallis College and Agricultural College of Oregon.
In 1871, the Corvallis College Board of Trustees purchased a 35-acre farm to comply with the
1862 Morrill Act, which specified that each land-grant college own at least 35 acres of land. This
farm was referred to as the Experimental Farm, and is known today as Lower Campus. In 1881,
the institution was renamed Corvallis Agricultural College, and in 1882 it was renamed Corvallis
College and Oregon State Agricultural School. In 1883, the Department of Agriculture was
established, which was the first of its kind in the Pacific Northwest. In 1888, as a result of the
1887 Federal Hatch Act, the Oregon Agricultural Experiment Station began research activities.
In 1888, the institution was renamed State Agricultural College of the State of Oregon, and in
1889 the college was relocated from its 5th and Madison location to its present location. The
Oregon Legislative assembly appropriated funds to purchase an additional 155 acres of land west
of 26th Street. In 1890, the institution was renamed Oregon Agricultural College. It became a
leader in gender equality by being one of three land-grant institutions in the nation to offer
scientific courses to woman.
Figure 1.9: Women Students at Oregon Agricultural College, circa 1898
In 1893, orange was selected as the school color and the students immediately adopted black as
the background color. The Athletic Department, including a football team, was established in
1893. The first mascot was a coyote named Jimmie. Benny Beaver was introduced in 1952 and
remains the mascot today. In 1894, new buildings were constructed for agriculture, horticulture,
photography, and mechanical arts.
1-14
Campus Master Plan
Introduction
Figure 1.10: OSU Campus, circa 1911
Figure 1.11: Education Hall, circa 1912
Figure 1.12: Memorial Union Construction, circa 1927
Campus Master Plan
1-15
Introduction
In 1896, the institution was renamed the Agricultural College of the State of Oregon, although it
was still referred to as Oregon Agricultural College. In 1889, with an enrollment of 352, Oregon
Agricultural College was the largest college in Oregon. By 1890, the main campus had grown to
45 acres in size and the first sewers were installed. As student enrollment continued to grow, the
students organized a Student Assembly (now known as the Associated Students of Oregon State
University) and elected its first president in 1890. In 1902, the college joined the Northwest
Intercollegiate Association. In 1904, the Board of Regents allowed international students to
attend the college. In 1906, the 4-year Forestry curriculum was established. In 1907, the Board of
Regents appointed William Jasper Kerr as the sixth president of the college.
Kerr led the college through a 25-year period of growth, increasing the number of students,
faculty, academic and research programs, and physical facilities. New facilities were constructed,
including Strand Hall (1909), McAlexander Field House (1910), Gilmore Hall (formerly
Agricultural Engineering Building, 1912), Gilkey Hall (formerly Social Science Hall and Dairy
Building, 1912), Batcheller Hall (formerly Mines Building, 1913), Milam Hall (formerly Home
Economics Building, 1914), Langton Hall (1915), Moreland Hall (formerly Forestry Building,
1917), Kidder Hall (formerly Library Building, 1918), Pharmacy Hall (formerly Pharmacy
Building, 1924), and Weatherford Hall (1928). During this time period, educational opportunities
expanded to include the Forestry Department (1910), School of Pharmacy (1917), School of
Vocational Education (1917), Horticultural Products Program (now known as the Food Science
and Technology Department, 1919), School of Basic Arts and Sciences (1922), and Peavy
Arboretum (1925). The School of Pharmacy received recognition from the American Medical
Association in 1924, and in 1929 received accreditation.
In 1926, the Oregon Agricultural College was placed on the accredited list of the Association of
American Universities, and in 1929 the college became part of the Oregon State System of
Higher Education. In 1932, President Kerr was appointed the Chancellor of the Oregon State
System of Higher Education. In 1934, George Peavy was appointed the seventh president of
Oregon Agricultural College.
Over the next 25 years, the college continued to
expand with the construction of Plageman Hall
(1936), Gilbert Hall (1939), Oregon Forest Product
Laboratory (1941), Industrial Building (1947),
Dearborn Hall (1949), Gill Coliseum (1950),
Wiegand Hall (1951), Parker Stadium, now known
as Reser Stadium (1953), Forest Experiment Station
(1954), Gleeson Hall (1955), Cordley Hall (1956),
Weatherford Dining Hall (1957), and Snell Hall
(1959).
Figure 1.13: Aerial View of OSU, early 1930s
1-16
Campus Master Plan
Introduction
Educational opportunities also expanded during this time, including the Guidance Clinic
established by the School of Education (1935), professional engineering degrees (Ch.E., C.E.,
E.E., M.E., 1935), Naval ROTC (1946), Air Force ROTC (1949), Physical Education (1950),
Science Research Institute (1952), and School of Humanities and Social Sciences (1959).
In 1961, a legislative act signed by Governor Mark Hatfield changed the name of the institution
to Oregon State University. As such, the university continues to expand and diversify its
educational opportunities with Engineering, Environmental Sciences, Forestry, Pharmacy, and
other high-quality programs that offer exceptional opportunities for study and research.
OSU’s high-quality academic and research programs are attracting high-quality students. In the
fall of 2002, for example, incoming OSU freshman had an average high school GPA of 3.46—
the highest of any Oregon University System school. The student population is diverse and
continues to grow; more than 1,200 international students study at OSU each year, adding
diversity and richness to the university’s academic and cultural life.
OSU now has campuses and experimental stations across the state. The OSU Corvallis campus is
approximately 570 acres and is the premier research university of the Oregon University System.
It is a comprehensive public Carnegie Research university, recognized as the only land-, sea-,
and space-grant institution in the state.
1.5
OSU Campus Planning History
a.
1909 Olmsted Brothers Plan
The distinctive atmosphere of the campus—its
historic buildings, tree-lined streets, a spacious
and inviting campus core, and a network of
pedestrian paths—is largely the result of the 1909
campus plan created by the Olmsted Brothers of
Brookline, Massachusetts. Olmsted Brothers was
a renowned landscape architectural firm founded
by Frederick Law Olmsted. John Olmsted and
Frederick Law Olmsted Jr. took over the firm and
its practice the decade before Frederick Law
Olmsted Sr. passed away in 1903.
Figure 1.14: 1909 Olmsted Brothers Plan
Frederick Law Olmsted Sr. and the Olmsted firm designed New York’s Central Park and
Stanford University, and contributed to many of America’s most treasured landscapes including
the U.S. Capitol and White House grounds, Great Smokey Mountains, Acadia National Parks,
Yosemite Valley, and entire park systems in cities including Seattle, Portland, Boston, and
Louisville.
Campus Master Plan
1-17
Introduction
The 1909 campus plan, which integrates park design, conservation, town planning, and
landscape architecture into the campus environment, embodies the philosophy and spirit of
Frederick Law Olmsted Sr. His basic design philosophy is apparent in the plan’s detail to
creating communal spaces through the use of quads, formal tree-lined streets, and manicured
open space areas. The harmonious integration of architecture and landscape planning encourages
interactions between human-built and natural communities.
The 1909 plan sought to create symmetry through building design and placement, and
connectivity among buildings through the use of sidewalks and paths. For many years,
development at OSU followed the framework of the historic Olmsted plan.
b.
1926 Long-Range Physical Development Plan
It is presumed that A.D. Taylor, a landscape
architect and town planner, provided the initial
1926 plan. However, John V. Bennes, a Portlandbased architect, expanded upon the plan by
incorporating men’s and women’s residence halls
not shown in the 1926 plan.
Figure 1.15: 1926 Physical Development Plan
c.
Both the Taylor and Bennes plans are reasonably
similar to the earlier campus layout projected in
the 1909 Olmsted Brothers plan.
1945 Long-Range Physical Development Plan
A.D. Taylor completed the 1945 development
plan during the latter stages of World War II. One
noticeable change to the earlier plans is the lower
campus area (labeled East Campus). This plan
proposed the addition of 11th Street to bisect the
lower campus area. Another change proposed that
Administration be located in the central wing of
the building known as Strand Ag Hall.
Figure 1.16: 1945 Physical Development Plan
The 1945 plan shows many men’s and women’s
residence halls that resemble today’s Sackett Hall
and Weatherford Hall. The plan also provided the first indications of relocating the
intercollegiate athletic fields south of the railroad tracks, along with the provision of a new field
house. In addition, the plan proposed repetition of equally spaced trees lining nearly every street.
The one exception to these tree-lined streets is the internal loop road in the lower campus.
1-18
Campus Master Plan
Introduction
d.
1964 Long-Range Physical Development Plan
Prepared by Louis A. DeMonte and Albert R. Wagner, the 1964 development plan was
undertaken in the 1960s during OSU’s massive construction program. Although an obvious
departure from previous plans, it recognized and respected the basic layout and circulation routes
of the 1945 plan. This updated plan proposed a controlled internal loop road system.
DeMonte was careful to locate building masses
and open space in a manner that provided a
constant interplay between them and that avoided
long, uninterrupted building facades. This
exchange between building masses and open
space is evident throughout the plan and was
instrumental in preserving the openness of
campus. This plan was the first to identify parking
areas.
Figure 1.17: 1964 Physical Development Plan
e.
1976 Long-Range Physical Development Plan
Prepared by Louis A. DeMonte, Earl L.
Powell, and Edgar L.P. Yang, the 1976
development plan identified the intended
reserves of university land that would
eventually be developed for research, parking,
recreation, instruction, etc. This plan identifies
parking as a campus land use. The plan makes
many adjustments to the proposed building
sites relative to those in the 1964 plan.
Figure 1.18: 1976 Physical Development Plan
One of the most noticeable changes is the reduction of sites reserved for residence hall
construction. The reduction was due to the tendency of many students to seek off-campus
apartments in preference to living in campus-provided facilities. Another significant change is
the designation of a large land area reserved for Veterinary Medicine between 30th Street and
35th Street, south of the Southern Pacific Railroad. This was done to locate the new school of
Veterinary Medicine closer to the main campus where it could more easily interact with campus
administration, functions, and activities.
Campus Master Plan
1-19
Introduction
f.
1986 Long-Range Physical Development Plan
The 1986 development plan identified locations
for new buildings as well as expansions of
existing buildings. It also established a new OSU
zoning district. The zoning district included
development standards for building setbacks,
height, parking, and landscaping.
Figure 1.19: 1986 Physical Development Plan
g.
2004-2015 Campus Master Plan
This, the 2004-2015 Campus Master Plan (CMP),
attempts to draw from the integrity of past planning
efforts and incorporate their concepts to meet
today’s demands for higher education facilities.
Figure 1.20: 2004-2015 Campus Master Plan
Many planning issues are timeless: balancing
human-built and natural environments, creating a
pedestrian-oriented campus, creating facilities that
meet current and anticipated academic and research
needs, and minimizing traffic and parking impacts.
And while the university faces circumstances
similar to those that inspired earlier plans, it also
recognizes that today’s competition for academic
and research funds and programs places an ever
increasing demand on facilities to provide the
latest in technological advances and opportunities.
The CMP establishes a conceptual framework in which the inspiration of past plans and the
ideals of those eras are incorporated into the present expectations of the OSU community and the
anticipated needs of tomorrow’s students, staff, and faculty. This conceptual framework is based
on a design strategy that employs the following objectives: longevity, cohesiveness, collegiality,
functionality, and connectivity. These objectives are outlined in the next section.
1-20
Campus Master Plan
Introduction
1.6
CMP Plan Objectives
a.
Longevity
The OSU campus should be designed for longevity, i.e., the ability to continually attract students
and faculty. Factors that contribute to the campus’ longevity include the use of durable building
materials such as brick and stone and incorporation of design considerations such as building
scale and mass. These elements promote a pedestrian-friendly campus, establish inviting
landscape settings, encourage campus community interaction, and create an element of character
or sense of place that visitors and students will remember for years to come.
A simple, open, and orderly planned development process can help the campus achieve an image
that unifies the past and the present. The CMP’s sector approach continues the tradition of
longevity by identifying anticipated development throughout the sectors in order to meet the
needs of today and of the future.
b.
Cohesiveness
The CMP outlines design elements and implementation actions that establish visual continuity
and consistency for campus development over time. Campus architectural and landscape
development creates an identity that reinforces the relationship between the built and natural
environment. The basic massing, vertical organization, structure spacing, use of the building
proportion and location, and organization of plant material should foster a sense of place and a
cohesive framework.
Cohesiveness is an ongoing challenge because each new project must accept and embrace plan
objectives while responding to an array of functional and budgetary opportunities and
constraints. The CMP will help continue the cohesiveness of the campus by offering general
design guidelines along with sector-specific guidelines and policies.
c.
Collegiality
The ultimate success of any university is measured by how well it prepares students for their
future professions. Similarly, the success of a campus master plan is measured by how well it
creates a functional campus that supports academic and research excellence.
To this end, the CMP provides for communal spaces to encourage social interactions and support
different programs to stimulate academic collaboration. Clustered developments that reflect
program function not only add personality but also nurture the intellectual environment. Such
public and semi-public spaces should be consistent and connected both visually and physically to
the existing quad arrangements.
Campus Master Plan
1-21
Introduction
d.
Functionality
The CMP provides guidelines for future development within each sector while also establishing
minimum amounts of open space. This will ensure that a solid foundation for campus growth and
expansion is achieved through well-designed, functional structures, and attractive open space.
Unique requirements of some research facilities or other special use buildings will necessitate
creative design approaches to ensure that they retain the campus character.
e.
Connectivity
The OSU campus is primarily pedestrian-oriented. Clear physical and visual connections are
necessary to facilitate movement across the campus. Where practicable, vehicular and pedestrian
circulation should be separated. When vehicular and pedestrian circulation is shared or crossed,
traffic calming devices such as tree-lined streets, changes in paving materials, and narrow street
widths should be used to ensure pedestrian safety. A physical network of interconnected paths
and walkways intermingled with open spaces and quads is essential to linking buildings
throughout the campus. Visual connectivity also helps pedestrians establish a line of sight and
orientation through landmarks.
1.7
CMP Planning Process
The CMP was instituted at the request of the State of Oregon Board of Higher Education, under
the direction of Mark McCambridge, Vice President for Finance and Administration for Oregon
State University. The planning team analyzed the physical characteristics of the campus
buildings and grounds, evaluated the long-term program needs of all campus components, and
developed planning goals. The CMP’s conceptual framework evolved from input by
representatives of the academic community (deans, department heads, provosts, etc), campus
staff, students, faculty, and members of the Corvallis community.
The CMP planning process encompasses five stages:
1.
Data Collection and Analysis
Data from group workshops, surveys, and independent interviews with OSU’s president,
provosts, deans, department heads, staff, and students provided the basis for understanding
academic program, research, and enrollment growth and operational needs.
2.
Concept Development
Campus long-term development needs were assessed, and conceptual approaches, policies, and
guidelines were developed to establish a framework to meet those needs.
3.
Documentation
The most acceptable planning solutions for the conceptual approaches, policies, and guidelines
were documented in a preliminary CMP document.
1-22
Campus Master Plan
Introduction
4.
Community Outreach
OSU’s Facilities Services engaged the broader campus community and surrounding
neighborhoods in a series of outreach meetings. These and follow-up outreach meetings further
refined the draft CMP.
5.
Review and Approval
OSU officials worked with the campus community, surrounding neighborhoods, City of
Corvallis staff, and elected officials. An implementation strategy was then developed to allow
the campus to expand and to ensure that key elements of the CMP were carried out.
1.8
Organization of the Campus Master Plan
The Campus Master Plan is organized into the following chapters:
Chapter 1 – Introduction
Campus Master Plan purpose and overview, OSU mission, history, and CMP planning
objectives, processes, and organization.
Chapter 2 – CMP Principles and Policies
Principles and policies to direct future campus development.
Chapter 3 – Projected Facility Needs
Enrollment growth potential and development facility needs.
Chapter 4 – Campus Development
Campus sectors and sector development policies.
Chapter 5 – Design Guidelines
Site and building design guidelines and preservation of natural resources.
Chapter 6 – Transportation Plan
Transportation system analysis and transportation improvement plan.
Chapter 7 – Parking Plan
Parking facility analysis and parking facility improvement plan.
Chapter 8 – Implementation
CMP implementation proposal in the form of a revised OSU Development District for adoption
by the City of Corvallis.
Campus Master Plan
1-23
Introduction
Appendix A – Sector Detail
Details for each sector including list of the buildings, its square footage, and the amount of
impervious coverage.
Appendix B – Sector Map
A scaled map of the campus with the sectors identified.
Appendix C –Neighborhood Traffic and Parking Task Force
A purpose statement and scope for the OSU Neighborhood Traffic and parking Task Force
Appendix D – Oregon State University Neighborhood Charter Statement
A statement that describes how neighbors shall participate in future CMP updates
1-24
Campus Master Plan
Introduction
Figure 1.21: Aerial Map of OSU with Sector Boundary
Campus Master Plan
1-25
Campus Master Plan
2004-2015
Chapter 2 – Principles and Policies
Figure 2.1: CMP Input Sources
CMP Principles and Policies
2.0 Campus Master Plan Principles and Policies
This chapter identifies the guiding principles that provide direction for the long-range
development of the OSU campus. The principles and associated sets of policies are based on
input from the students, faculty, staff, and community, and support those policies within the City
of Corvallis Comprehensive Plan, City of Corvallis 2020 Vision Statement, and other applicable
plans and special studies that address issues such as community well-being, land use
compatibility, transportation, protection of natural resources, and public safety.
2.1
Community Relationships
To improve opportunities for students and the area’s citizens, OSU seeks to foster positive
relations with surrounding communities and with local and state agencies. OSU will work with
neighbors and the neighborhood associations adjacent to OSU’s boundaries so proactive and
cooperative strategies are planned and implemented to minimize impact from development on
the character of those adjacent neighborhoods. To this end, OSU will hold an annual Town Hall
meeting with neighbors to discuss the annual CMP monitoring report and other matters that
pertain to maintaining good community relations. OSU will also attend Neighborhood
Associations meetings as necessary to ensure that good relations are maintained over the years.
Policies
2.1.1
Continue to work with the City of Corvallis, Benton County, and other governmental
agencies to address issues of community concern.
2.1.2
Develop an understanding of issues that arise from OSU growth and development. Where
negative impacts are anticipated or experienced, develop and implement mitigation plans
to minimize impacts on the surrounding community.
2.1.3
Create an information exchange process in which adjacent property owners can
conveniently comment on potential campus development.
2.1.4
Continue to support community events on campus.
2.1.5
Establish partnerships with local schools, businesses, and others to promote educational
opportunities and programs.
2.1.6
Prepare management plans for OSU-owned property outside the city limits but within the
urban growth boundary. Management plans shall be consistent with the principles and
policies of the CMP and responsive to specific resource needs, research and educational
objectives, and compatibility issues.
Campus Master Plan
2-1
CMP Principles and Policies
2.1.7
OSU shall participate as a full partner and in good faith in a community task force with
City and community representatives to measure, assess, and monitor traffic and parking
conditions within areas adjacent to OSU’s north campus boundary. OSU shall assist with
mitigation efforts for existing and future negative impacts. If other task forces are
formed and approved by the City to review traffic and parking conditions within other
geographical areas adjacent to the OSU District Boundary, then OSU shall participate in
those task forces as well.
2.1.8
OSU shall conduct an annual Town Hall meeting to present and discuss the results of the
annual CMP monitoring report with neighbors.
2.1.9
OSU shall cooperatively work with adjacent property owners and neighbors to
proactively maintain and protect the existing integrity of the established neighborhood
character for those neighborhoods adjacent to OSU’s boundaries.
2.1.10 OSU shall ensure that any proposed development adjacent to or visible from the College
Hill West Historic District and along the south side of Orchard Avenue from 30th to 35th
Street is compatible to the character and integrity of that historic district.
2.1.11 Each fall OSU shall conduct an annual parking utilization study of the existing
neighborhood parking districts. OSU will also encourage the involvement of adjacent
property owners and members of the Neighborhood Traffic and Parking Task Force when
completing the parking utilization studies of the neighborhood districts.
2.1.12 OSU shall support and maintain a graceful edge along the OSU District boundary by
promoting a “clean image” of its property through the removal of debris, the screening of
outdoor storage areas, trash enclosures, and mechanical equipment in accordance with
LDC 3.36.50.14, and by preventing buildings and structures from falling into disrepair.
2.1.13 OSU and the neighbors shall prepare a Charter Statement that outlines a purpose
statement, planning assumptions for future CMP updates, the tenets of the OSU and
neighbors relationship, common concerns for consideration for future CMP updates, and
future planning goals for future CMP updates.
Campus Master Plan
2-2
CMP Principles and Policies
2.2
Academic and Research Excellence
OSU is determined to set the standard in academic and research
excellence. To this end, OSU seeks to enhance, redefine, and establish
educational programs that benefit students and faculty.
By improving existing academic and research facilities and developing
new and technologically advanced facilities, OSU will continue to attract
a high caliber of students and faculty.
Figure 2.2: Linus Pauling, 1922 OSU Graduate and Recipient of the 1954 Nobel Prize
for Chemistry and 1962 Nobel Peace Prize
Policies
2.2.1
Continue to support teaching and research programs unique to a land-, sea-, and spacegrant university.
2.2.2
Encourage interdisciplinary collaborations and interactive learning experiences within
academic and research programs.
2.2.3
Maintain and/or upgrade existing facilities to the extent practicable. When replacement
becomes more viable than retention, encourage reuse and/or recycling of materials.
2.2.4
Create facilities that address current and anticipated needs and are adaptable to future
academic and research initiatives and activities.
2.2.5
Pursue research grants and other funding opportunities that support the interest and
programs of faculty and students.
2.2.6
Establish partnerships with businesses that provide academic opportunities through
student internships, scholarships, and other compelling learning experiences.
2.2.7
Establish partnerships with other institutions to promote OSU’s academic, research, and
planning efforts.
2.2.8
Locate academic programs and research activities at sites that are suitable and desirable
for their function and that contribute to the campus environment.
2.2.9
Continue to support the Associated Students of Oregon State University and encourage
student involvement with issues that impact student programs and events.
2.2.10 Emphasize programs and initiatives that are aimed at attracting and maintaining a high
caliber of students and faculty.
Campus Master Plan
2-3
CMP Principles and Policies
2.2.11 Examine methods and initiatives to ensure that OSU remains competitive and among the
top-tier universities in the nation.
2.3
Student Life and Services
OSU recognizes that today’s students are tomorrow’s alumni and that positive student
experiences are crucial to the university’s lasting success. To this end, OSU encourages
opportunities for academic collaboration, recreation, cultural exchange, social interaction, and
various other programs that provide students with a safe, enriched, and diverse campus.
Policies
2.3.1
Continue to promote the campus as a pedestrian-friendly environment. Safe and direct
access among buildings, parking areas, and other destinations shall be maintained or
enhanced with new development.
2.3.2
Continue to provide adequate and accessible communal spaces throughout campus that
encourage the exchange of ideas and informal interactions.
2.3.3
Continue to evaluate the needs of OSU’s recognized cultural centers and provide
facilities that support the centers and the exchange of cultural traditions.
2.3.4
Provide adequate on-campus student housing that is safe, accessible, and promotes
academic and social interaction.
2.3.5
Continue to support student health services and related programs to ensure that students
have access to proper and efficient health services.
2.3.6
Continue to provide adequate recreation areas, facilities, and programs that promote
physical health activities and intramural sports.
2.3.7
Provide access to dining, recreational, meeting, and other facilities at major academic
sites on campus.
2.3.8
Provide adequate security measures across campus to ensure the safety of the campus
community. Such measures may include exterior lighting along walkways and parking
areas, properly landscaped building grounds, visually accessible doorways, and programs
such as Safe Ride.
2.3.9
Continue to provide universal access, consistent with Americans with Disabilities Act
(ADA) standards, to campus buildings and sites.
2.3.10 OSU shall engage in discussions with students in a proactive and cooperative manner
should the need to relocate People’s Park becomes necessary in the future.
2-4
Campus Master Plan
CMP Principles and Policies
2.3.11 The size of a relocated People’s Park shall be, at a minimum, the size of the existing
People’s Park as of the year 2004-2005.
2.4
Athletics
OSU athletics have helped shape the campus and enhance OSU’s national
reputation as a dynamic university.
OSU should continue to support its athletic programs and provide the
necessary facilities to ensure competitiveness. Athletic facilities should be
clustered together as much as practicable and offer convenient access to
nearby collectors and arterials.
Figure 2.3: OSU Football Player
Policies
2.4.1
Explore methods to develop athletic facilities and uses within a central area with
convenient access to nearby collectors and arterials.
2.4.2
Support projects and other improvements, such as the Reser Stadium expansion project,
Gill Annex project, or the addition of soccer field lighting, to increase the appeal and
competitive stature of OSU athletics.
2.4.3
Explore opportunities for new partnerships to bring greater exposure and opportunity to
the Athletic Department.
2.5
Site Development, Operations, and Management
Successful growth and development of the
OSU campus depends on cooperation among
its administrators, faculty, staff, students, and
the greater Oregon community. The
development of facilities, organization of
space, and management of traffic are all
aspects of growth that need to be addressed
from an understanding of how such
development and management benefits the
OSU community and advances the
university’s mission.
Campus Master Plan
Figure 2.4: Architectural Design for Renovation of
Weatherford Hall, 2003
2-5
CMP Principles and Policies
Cohesive planning, construction, and management of development is vital to the success of
improvement and development projects.
Policies
2.5.1
Ensure that all future development is consistent with the City of Corvallis
Comprehensive Plan, Land Development Code, and other adopted local plans (e.g.,
utility, transportation, etc.).
2.5.2
Design new buildings and renovations to be compatible with existing structures, cost
effective to operate and maintain, and supportive of student and faculty academic and
research interests.
2.5.3
Evaluate the feasibility of renovating existing buildings to meet current code and seismic
standards.
2.5.4
Incorporate sustainability concepts in decision-making with regard to construction,
operations, and management.
2.5.5
Use financially sustainable funding mechanisms that do not place unreasonable demands
on the university’s debt capacity.
2.5.6
Create and improve space in such a way that it does not place unreasonable constraints
on operating costs or maintenance requirements.
2.5.7
Arrange the campus layout and building placement to reinforce academic and operations
relationships by locating functionally related programs near each other and consolidating
activities with similar physical requirements. To the extent practicable, site major
academic buildings within the core campus area and within a 10-minute walk of other
academic buildings.
2.5.8
Avoid significant building additions that overpower the existing structures and pedestrian
scale of surrounding spaces and uses.
2.5.9
Orient building entrances toward streets. Landscaping, building mass, and height should
be similar to that of surrounding buildings.
2.5.10 Design buildings following the architectural guidelines set forth by the university.
2.5.11 Maintain space between buildings to ensure adequate areas for landscaping and
circulation for pedestrians, service vehicles, and bicycles.
2-6
Campus Master Plan
CMP Principles and Policies
2.5.12 Encourage preservation of the historic street grid and usability of the street system with
new development organized to create usable open spaces that facilitate ease of pedestrian
and vehicular movement.
2.5.13 Develop improved campus entrance portals and information kiosks on the east side of
campus (e.g., Jefferson Street and/or Monroe Street) and on the south side of campus on
26th and Western Boulevard.
2.5.14 Encourage the protection and restoration of historically significant buildings and
structures.
2.5.15 Develop a system that assesses and monitors campus space needs within buildings and
facilities through clear and objective standards. Evaluate the effectiveness of this system
and, as needed, make adjustments.
2.5.16 Reduce the visual impacts of new development by using similar building materials and
scale, landscaping, and by siting buildings to maximize open space and maintain
viewsheds as much as practicable.
2.5.17 Any project adjacent to the College Hill West Historic District shall have an advisory
review by the City of Corvallis Historic Preservation Advisory Board (HPAB), or its
successor. The HPAB shall forward its recommendation to the appropriate reviewing
body (i.e., City of Corvallis Planning Commission, OSU Campus Planning Committee)
for consideration.
2.5.18 OSU shall form a Historic Preservation Task Force (HPTF) in accordance with Section
3.3(b) Buildings Recognized as Historic of CMP six months after the effective date of the
CMP approval.
2.5.19 The OSU Historic Preservation Task Force shall prepare a Historic Preservation or
conservation plan in accordance with Section 3.3(b) of the CMP within two years of the
completion of the profile.
2.5.20 The OSU Campus Planning Committee shall review all proposed modifications to known
and potentially historic resources on campus in accordance with the Historic Preservation
Plan.
2.6
Transportation, Circulation, and Parking
OSU recognizes the importance of a well-organized campus transportation system that integrates
with the city’s system. OSU also recognizes its role in contributing to the traffic and parking
impact within the neighborhoods adjacent to its boundaries. By promoting alternative modes of
transportation and fostering pedestrian-oriented development, transportation improvement can
focus on providing safe, direct and functional travel patterns across campus.
Campus Master Plan
2-7
CMP Principles and Policies
To promote the same standards of traffic safety and direct and functional travel patterns within
adjacent neighborhoods, OSU shall participate in a neighborhood task force in accordance with
Appendix C of the CMP.
OSU will also complete a neighborhood parking utilization study each fall. The results will
shape recommendations to reduce utilization in areas that exceed acceptable levels. OSU will
submit the results of the study and its recommendations to the neighborhood task force and the
City for review and consideration.
Policies
See Chapter 6 for policies addressing transportation and circulation, and Chapter 7 for policies
addressing parking.
2.7
Pedestrian Systems and Open Space
Pedestrian systems and open spaces must provide safe
and well-defined corridors for the movement of
thousands of people.
Any expansion or improvement to a pedestrian
system should adequately provide for cross-campus
movement with convenient locations for exiting and
entering the campus.
Figure 2.5: Northwest View from the Valley Library
The existing open space system provides a framework for future development. New buildings
and streets should be designed to encourage communal spaces through the use of plazas,
courtyards, atriums, or other such areas that allow people an opportunity to co-mingle.
Policies
2.7.1
Retain a minimum of 50 percent of the campus as open space, which includes landscape
areas, parks, recreation fields, and agricultural fields; hardscape amenities such as
sidewalks, public plazas, quads, and courtyards; and non-developed areas.
2.7.2
Retain the open space areas within each development sector consistent with the minimum
established open space sector standard. Open space shall provide the framework for
campus development and shall be integrated into development plans.
2.7.3
Continue to maintain and enhance pedestrian walkways throughout the campus,
especially with new development.
2-8
Campus Master Plan
CMP Principles and Policies
2.7.4
Provide open spaces such as public plazas, quads, courtyards, atriums, etc. as an element
of each building site design.
2.7.5
Reinforce the pedestrian nature of campus by minimizing the need for private
automobiles for cross-campus travel. This shall be done by locating parking areas on the
campus perimeter and by maintaining a street system that directs traffic to nearby
collectors and arterials, to the maximum extent practicable.
2.7.6
Continue to maintain and enhance open spaces such as lawns, planting beds, courtyards,
sidewalks, plazas, quads, and other landscape areas through the adequate funding of
grounds maintenance.
2.7.7
Repair and/or replace unsightly and unsafe walkway surfaces, and expand walkways that
do not adequately accommodate pedestrian traffic.
2.7.8
Establish a pedestrian network of paths and sidewalks for safe and convenient access to
sites on and off campus.
2.7.9
Develop a campus-wide bicycle route system that uses a combination of on-street bike
lanes and off-street multi-use paths.
2.7.10 Preserve the existing open space character of the lower campus and quads. These open
spaces are an important historical element in the system established by the 1909 Olmsted
Brothers plan (Chapter 1).
2.8
Environmental Stewardship and Natural Features
OSU recognizes its responsibility to the environment and will continue to use environmentally
responsible and responsive development practices. These practices, defined as “sustainability,”
shall be incorporated into the design, construction, renovation, expansion, and operation of
facilities and structures. OSU encourages other sustainability efforts including improving current
environmental conditions, reducing impacts on known natural resources, and continuing reuse
and recycling efforts.
The recently completed City of Corvallis Natural Features Inventory identifies wetlands, riparian
areas, vegetation, and other natural resources on OSU property. See Table 2.1.
Campus Master Plan
2-9
CMP Principles and Policies
Table 2.1: City-Inventoried Natural Features on OSU Property
Wetland
WC-Oak, W-1
WC-Oak, W-2
WC-Oak, W-4
*WC-Oak, W-5
WC-Oak,W-6
* WC-Oak, W-7
WC-Squ,W-1
Riparian
WC-Oak, R-1
WC-Oak, R-5
WC-Oak, R-9
WC-Oak, R-12
WC-Oak, R-15
WC-Oak, R-31
WC-Squ, R-6
WC-Squ, R-11
Tree Groves
WC-TG-17
WC-TG-19
WC-TG-20
WC-TG-21
WC-TG-22
WC-TG-23
WC-TG-24
* - Not on Main Campus, Adjacent to Boundary
WC-West Central Study Area
Oak-Oak Creek Stormwater Basin
Squ-Squaw Creek Stormwater Basin
TG-Tree Grove
W- Wetland
R-Riparian
nn-Inventory number
a.
Wetlands
As inventoried, five verified wetland areas are in the CMP boundary and two verified wetland
areas immediately adjacent to the CMP boundary area. WC-Oak-W-1 is located on the northeast
corner of the Western Boulevard and 35th Street intersection. WC-Oak-W-1 is characterized by
saturation within the upper 12 inches of soil and has a hydrological pattern with approximately
67 percent of dominant plant species that serve as indicators for the presence of wetlands.
WC-Oak-W-2 is located north of Western Boulevard, between 30th Street and 35th Street in
Sector E. It has features similar to those of WC-Oak-W-1.
WC-Oak-W-4 is located west of the Hinsdale Wave Research Lab in Sector A. It is characterized
by saturation within the upper 12 inches of soil and has a hydrological pattern with
approximately 100 percent of dominant plant species that serve as indicators for the presence of
wetlands.
WC-Oak-W-6 is located northwest of the Hinsdale Wave Research Lab and has features similar
to those of WC-Oak-W-1 and W-2. WC-Oak-W-6 is located on OSU property but outside of the
CMP plan area. Future management plans for lands outside the CMP plan area will address
features identified as significant through inventory efforts.
b.
Riparian Areas
As inventoried, nine riparian areas are in the CMP plan area. The vegetation within the riparian
areas associated with Oak Creek (WC-Oak) consists of Oregon ash (Fraxinus latifolia), Oregon
white oak (Quercus garryana), and Bigleaf maple (Acer macrophyllum). This vegetation has a
2-10
Campus Master Plan
CMP Principles and Policies
rating of mostly medium to high for such functions as water quality, flood management, thermal
regulation, and wildlife habitat.
The vegetation within the riparian areas associated with Squaw Creek consists of Bigleaf maple
and Oregon ash, and has a rating of mostly medium to high for such functions as water quality,
flood management, thermal regulation, and wildlife habitat.
c.
Tree Groves
As inventoried, seven tree groves are within the CMP plan area. These tree groves are five acres
or smaller in size, but may have scenic, aesthetic, and other functional value apart from wildlife
habitat. The vegetation in the tree groves includes American elm (Ulmus americana), Oregon
white oak (Quercus garryana), Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii), and a variety of
ornamentals. A full description and rating can be found in the city’s inventory records.
d.
Floodplains
Portions of OSU-owned property are located within the 100-year floodplains of Oak Creek and
Mary’s River. Property located in Sector A, west and east of 35th Street, and immediately north
of Western Boulevard, is within the 100-year floodplain of Oak Creek. The south and east
portions of Sector J (i.e., South Farm property) are within the 100-year floodplain of Mary’s
River. OSU recognizes the importance of protecting floodplains from impacts typically
associated with development and will work with the city to ensure that future development is
consistent with the city regulations and plans that govern floodplains and stormwater
management.
The 1986 OSU Physical Development Plan identified an Oak Creek Drainage-way Management
Area. This area included the floodplain, floodway, and riparian vegetation along Oak Creek.
OSU has entered into management agreements with the city regarding responsibilities and the
activities that can occur within this area. These agreements cover the area east and west of 35th
Street in the vicinity of Western Boulevard. As additional development occurs within floodplain
areas, OSU will continue to enter into agreements for floodplain management.
Policies
2.8.1
Continue to remove outdoor storage or accumulation of unwanted and unnecessary debris
in and around campus, especially in those Oak Creek Drainage-way Agreement Areas
specific in the Corvallis Development Code Chapter 3.36.50.07.
2.8.2
Continue to enter into drainage-way management agreements in accordance with Chapter
3.36.50.07 when development occurs on a parcel fronting or adjacent to the City’s
drainage-ways, such as Oak Creek or explore other methods to manage and protect the
portion of Oak Creek adjacent to OSU lands.
Campus Master Plan
2-11
CMP Principles and Policies
2.8.3
Minimize environmental impacts from construction and on-going maintenance and
operations through the use of Best Management Practices.
2.8.4
Complete an inventory and assessment of existing trees to determine potential impacts to
those trees during future development projects. Develop protocols and standards for tree
protection during construction and maintenance activities.
2.8.5
Continue to support and expand, whenever practicable, reduction, reuse, and recycling
programs on campus, including salvage of buildings due to be demolished.
2.8.6
Encourage the use of sustainable materials and design principles that preserve natural
resources and minimize negative impacts to the environment.
2.8.7
Require the proper management of stormwater runoff, for both quantity and quality,
consistent with applicable city regulations and plans (e.g., Stormwater Management
Master Plan) to reduce potential off-site impacts. Consider the use of bio-swales,
pervious paving, eco-roofs, landscaping, and other treatments to reduce peak flow
impacts, and promote water quality treatment.
2.8.8
Locate wastewater sites and facilities for receiving, processing, and storing hazardous
materials so they will not impact natural resources or residential areas.
2.8.9
Provide landscape regeneration in all aspects of site development that reflects the micro
and macro environments of the region.
2.8.10 Promote sustainability when setting policies and making administrative decisions.
2.8.11 Seek and implement efficiencies in resource consumption. Consider incorporating energy
conservation techniques, such as siting of buildings for energy savings, integration of
natural lighting, installation of passive heating and ventilation systems, and other
improvements that increase energy efficiency.
2.8.12 Develop and implement plans to achieve the properly functioning condition of Oak Creek
with establishment of future Oak Creek management agreements.
2.8.13 Ensure the goal of no net loss of significant wetlands in terms of both acreage and
function, and comply with protection requirements of applicable city, state, and federal
wetland laws as interpreted by the enforcing agencies.
2.8.14 Cooperate with the City of Corvallis to ensure the protection and preservation of
inventoried natural features to the maximum extent practicable and, as needed, develop
management plans to this end.
2.8.15 OSU shall proactively and strategically incorporate sustainable design and techniques in
its planning and construction projects
2-12
Campus Master Plan
CMP Principles and Policies
2.9
Lighting and Site Furnishings
Lighting and site furnishing contribute to the university’s overall aesthetics
and identity. The university’s selection and placement of these fixtures
should draw attention to the major axis of campus, instill a sense of identity,
define campus boundaries, and create safe, well-lit corridors for pedestrian
movement. OSU shall install lighting fixtures that cast illumination
downward to reduce potential light pollution on the night sky.
Policies
2.9.1
Create a sense of identity in the campus core by installing “historic”
light fixtures and by using a cohesive design for benches, bike racks,
trash receptacles, and signage. Similar finishes, colors, and materials
should be used to create a sense of cohesiveness.
2.9.2
Define the perimeter and major cross axis of campus through the use
of street signs, building name signs, and “historic” light fixtures.
Building name signs shall be located in front of buildings. Light
fixtures should be placed in straight, linear rows that emphasize the
axial layout of the campus.
2.9.3
Space “historic’ fixtures 80 feet to 100 feet apart at a 12-foot pole
height to create safe, uniformly lit corridors along primary pedestrian
routes.
Figure 2.6: Historic
Light Fixture
2.9.4
Continue to seek and install energy-efficient light fixtures that provide adequate
illumination but are designed to cast the illumination downward.
2.9.5
Use contemporary light fixtures for parking lots, utility areas, and remote locations
outside the historic core of the campus.
2.9.6
Develop “portals” for major campus entry points through special attention to lighting,
site furnishings, and signage.
2.9.7
Enhance selected areas of the campus including major gathering areas, building entries,
and/or lawn areas with appropriate amenities such as benches, trash receptacles, signage,
and wayfinding kiosks.
2.9.8
Place bicycle racks near building entrances but without obstructing building access.
2.9.9
Consider centrally locating bicycle storage for major campus events such as football
games and concerts.
Campus Master Plan
2-13
CMP Principles and Policies
2.10 Utility Infrastructure
The utility infrastructure (e.g., electric, water, stormwater, sewer, fiber optic cable, etc.) installed
across campus spans the years of the university’s existence. Some systems, such as the sewer
and drainage systems, are in need of upgrade, whereas other systems are in better condition.
Over the CMP planning period, however, significant expansions and upgrades to the support
infrastructure will be needed. These improvements will need to be planned and coordinated to
meet anticipated needs and to ensure that interruptions to services are minimized. It is imperative
that utilities are maintained, upgraded, and expanded in a manner that provides needed services
to support activities on campus.
Policies
2.10.1 Maintain an inventory and maps of all utilities on campus. The university shall routinely
update its utility maps to reflect additions or expansions to the system that result from
new development, building remodeling, and renovations. The university shall routinely
provide the City with the OSU utility map updates so the City may incorporate the
improvements into the City’s Geographical Information System.
2.10.2 Require that all contractors submit a complete set of “as built” drawings prior to closing
the construction project. Copies of complete “as-built” drawings shall be certified by the
design engineer and shall be submitted to the City for approval for all newly constructed
public improvements.
2.10.3 Encourage and support cogeneration, as much as practicable, as a means of supplying
OSU’s own primary power.
2.10.4 Continue to work with the power providers to establish a reliable power grid and develop
a cost-effective redundant system for the main campus. Ensure that those areas identified
as critical have reliable power and back-up systems.
2.10.5 Locate utility management systems to provide for centralized control and monitoring
operations, efficient expansion capabilities, and minimal personnel requirements.
2.10.6 Develop comprehensive stormwater management, sanitary sewer, and telecommunication
plans for campus consistent with city regulations and applicable plans.
2.10.7 Coordinate new construction with the CMP and Corvallis Land Development Chapter
3.36 to ensure the efficient and orderly extension of utilities.
2.10.8 Design building utilities that are readily accessible for incremental expansion or
modification.
2-14
Campus Master Plan
CMP Principles and Policies
2.10.9 Consolidate and centralize boilers, chillers, emergency generators, and primary electrical
services in one location at each site, where practicable. Utility distribution lines shall be
underground. Where facilities exist above ground, each incremental change or upgrade
shall be undertaken in a manner that either meets the standard for undergrounding or will
facilitate undergrounding at a later date.
2.10.10 All development shall comply with the City’s adopted utility and facility master plans
and Stormwater Master Plan.
2.10.11 OSU shall be responsible for construction of all facilities internal to and fronting
properties and for needed extensions of facilities to and through its site.
2.10.12 All development shall comply with the separation of storm drain systems from the
sanitary system in accordance with Community Development Policy 1003.
2.10.13 Any vegetation disturbed within a buffer through the installation and/or maintenance of
existing or newly installed utilities shall be replaced and/or restored.
Campus Master Plan
2-15
CAMPUS MASTER PLAN
2004-2015
Chapter 3 - Projected Facility Needs
Projected Facility Needs
3.0
Projected Facility Needs
OSU is determined to become one of the top-tier universities in the nation. Toward this end,
OSU focuses on providing a compelling learning experience through an array of academic and
research activities. These activities require facilities that offer advanced technological
capabilities and adequate support space for laboratories, graduate student offices, conference
rooms, classrooms, and work-study areas.
To meet the projected facility needs for the CMP’s planning period (2004 through 2015), new
development and renovation of existing facilities will be required. The new facilities and
renovations will expand learning and research opportunities consistent with the Governor’s
mission to promote knowledge-based economic development. It is also hoped that quality
facilities will foster collaboration among leaders of public and private institutions. The additional
square footage is not expected to spawn growth beyond the identified projected enrollment.
OSU’s facilities need to support the learning and research efforts of faculty and students and
allow them to compete on the national level. OSU also needs to consider the needs and
objectives of the local community. This requires campus facilities that are compatible with the
surrounding community’s building scale, mass, and appearance. OSU is committed to
developing facilities that balance the needs of the higher education system with those of the local
community.
3.1
OSU Population Projections
OSU’s student population has grown substantially over the years, from just over 1,500 students
in 1915 to around 19,000 today. Modest growth is expected to continue during the CMP’s
planning period. Table 3.1 shows historical student enrollment in 5-year increments from 1915
to 2000.
Table 3.1: Historical Student Enrollment
Year
1915
1920
1925
1930
1935
1940
1945
1950
1955
Enrollment
Population
1,525
3,077
3,229
3,347
3,142
4,759
3,126
5,887
6,160
Year
1960
1965
1970
1975
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
Enrollment
Population
7,899
11,906
15,509
16,601
17,689
15,261
16,048
14,261
16,788
Source: OSU Fact Book
Campus Master Plan
3-1
Projected Facility Needs
The Oregon University System (OUS) Institutional Research Services prepares enrollment
projections for all eight Oregon public universities. Below is the enrollment projection for OSU,
prepared July 2003. OSU is projected to have a student population of 22,074 by the year 2015.
For planning purposes, the CMP uses an enrollment projection of 22,500.
Table 3.2: Projected Student Enrollment
Head Count (HC)
Population Projection
19,067
19,164
19,352
19,798
20,300
20,750
21,043
21,095
21,156
21,296
21,628
22,074
22,500
Year
2003-2004
2004-2005
2005-2006
2006-2007
2007-2008
2008-2009
2009-2010
2010-2011
2011-2012
2012-2013
2013-2014
2014-2015
Adjusted for CMP
Source: OUS Institutional Research Services, July 2003
Potential growth in faculty has also been anticipated and incorporated into the analysis of future
facility needs. For fall 2003, the OSU faculty and staff population was 4,159. This population is
approximately 22 percent of student enrollment. It is anticipated that an increase in student
enrollment to 22,500 will require a faculty/staff population of 5,100.
Table 3.3: Projected Increase in OSU Student Enrollment and Faculty/Staff
Group
Students
Faculty/Staff
3-2
Fall 2003
Population
19,067
4,159
Future 2015
Population
22,500
5,100
Increase in
Population
3,823
941
Campus Master Plan
Projected Facility Needs
3.2
Campus Overview
OSU’s main campus currently has approximately 7.6 million gross square feet of academic,
research, and support space, which is a ratio of approximately 360 gross square feet of building
space per student. Comparable land-grant institutions, however, average 500 gross square feet of
building space per student. To stay competitive, OSU therefore needs to increase the square
footage-to-student ratio.
The average age of buildings on OSU’s main
campus is approximately 45 years. The average
age of buildings used for instruction is 55 years.
The oldest building on campus is Benton Hall,
which was constructed around 1889. Halsell Hall,
which was completed in 2002, is the newest
building on main campus.
Figure 3.1: Halsell Hall
a.
Campus Boundaries
The campus is well defined along the north boundary (Monroe and Orchard streets) and along
the south boundary (Western Boulevard from 15th Street to 35th Street). The northern edge of
campus is one of the more populated areas of the city and provides one of the major gateways
into the campus. The sports fields between Western Boulevard and Highway 20 connect the
campus to a major regional transportation system. The eastern boundary is not as well defined
and does not consistently abut peripheral transportation routes and access points. The
agricultural lands to the west are well defined and extend from 35th Street west to 53rd Street,
north of the railroad tracks.
No major land acquisitions are anticipated in the near future. Growth can be accommodated
through the focused development and redevelopment of existing land within the campus
boundary. As opportunities arise, however, OSU may acquire small, individual parcels on
campus (there are currently 7 privately held properties within the campus boundary).
Campus Master Plan
3-3
Projected Facility Needs
3.3
Existing Facilities
a.
General Facilities
There are 210 buildings on OSU property within the CMP plan area. These buildings house
activities for instruction, research, athletics, student services, and housing and dining. As noted
earlier, the average age of buildings on OSU’s main campus is approximately 38 years and the
average age of buildings that contain instructional classrooms is 55 years. However, the average
age of buildings varies by sector. See Table 3.4 below.
Table 3.4: Average Age of Buildings within Each Sector
Sector
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
J
Number of
Buildings
15
29
87
12
19
15
13
2
18
Average Age in
Years
38
42
57
33
42
32
29
2
67
Sector” I” is intentionally omitted. Does not include
improvements other than buildings (IOTB).
Each building has a certain assigned use or uses. Of the assignable square footage for the 210
buildings, support services represents the highest percentage of assigned space, while athletics
represents the lowest percentage of assigned space. Table 3.5 shows the assigned space for the
five predominant use categories within the CMP plan area.
Table 3.5: Space Assignment by Use Category
Use Category
Support Services
Housing and Dining
Research
Instructional
Athletics
Total
3-4
Percent
43
18
18
17
4
100
Campus Master Plan
Projected Facility Needs
Figure 3.2: OSU Historic Buildings
Campus Master Plan
3-5
Projected Facility Needs
b.
Buildings Recognized as Historic
Although no buildings or structures on campus are included on the National Register of Historic
Places, some buildings on campus are identified as “historic” by Oregon State Board of Higher
Education (OSBHE) and the City of Corvallis.
Table 3.6: Historic Buildings Listed with the City and OUS
Year
Built
1889
1892
City of
Corvallis
Yes
Yes
Building
OSBHE
Benton Hall
Yes
Benton Annex, previously
Yes
known as Women’s Center or
Paleontology Lab
Fairbanks Hall
1892
Yes
Yes
Gladys Valley Gymnastics
1898
Yes
Yes
Center, previously known as
Mitchell Playhouse
Apperson Hall
1900
Yes
Yes
Education Hall
1902
Yes
Yes
Waldo Hall
1907
No
Yes
McAlexander Fieldhouse
1911
Yes
Yes
Kidder Hall
1917
Yes
No
Women’s Building, previously
1926
Yes
Yes
known as Women’s Gym
Memorial Union
1928
Yes
No
Weatherford Hall
1928
Yes
Yes
W.A. Jenson Gate, previously
1940
Yes
Yes
known as Dad’s Gate
* Waldo Hall has been listed with the Board of Higher Education as a historic structure. Consequently proposed
exterior changes are coordinated with the State Historic Preservations Office (SHPO) per that listing.
These buildings and others across campus are recognized either as historically significant
resources or potentially significant resources. OSU recognizes its role as a steward of these
resources and through the CMP will establish the paradigm and polices to ensure historic
resources are preserved.
3-6
Campus Master Plan
Projected Facility Needs
To this end, OSU will establish a Historic Preservation Task Force (HPTF) in accordance with
the framework proposed by the City’s Historic Preservation Advisory Board. The goal of the
HPTF is to identify and develop a preservation or conservation plan for potentially significant
historic resources (including structures, landscapes, sites or other resources 50 years of age or
older) on the OSU campus within all sectors. Such a plan will consist of an inventory (i.e.,
profile) of the resources. This profile may include, but not be limited to photographic
documentation, a description of past and current uses, a list of previous renovation or remodel
projects, and an evaluation of work required to conserve existing historic resources (including
seismic upgrades, exterior façade repair and maintenance). These inventories or profiles will
incorporate any existing detailed inventories.
The profile will be used to assist the HPTF to establish the preservation or conservation plan.
OSU’s Historic Preservation Plan will include a set of design criteria for renovation and remodel
projects that may include, but not be limited to such factors as replacement of architectural
features (e.g., windows, doors), building additions, alterations, and attachments. The criteria will
balance the most appropriate historic preservation techniques and the need for OSU to meet its
other tenets of responsibility such as building and fire code regulations, energy conservation,
sustainable design practices, and the University’s mission of providing premier academic and
research facilities.
It is anticipated that the Historic Preservation Plan will also recommend revisions to the OSU
District that contains language to specifically direct historic preservation practices on campus
and establish acceptable thresholds for implementation.
The HPTF shall be a seven member task force that includes professionals with a broad
understanding of OSU’s history, its role in the community, with expertise in preservation-related
disciplines (e.g., archeology, cultural anthropology, architectural history, conservation, historic
landscape architecture, historic preservation planning). If not all of these disciplines are
represented at OSU, qualified experts will be invited from the broader community.
Additional representation may also include a preservation professional designated by the City’s
HPAB, facilities services staff, State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) staff, University
Archivist, archeology or anthropology faculty, neighbors, University Provosts and Vice
Presidents.
OSU will internally adopt the inventory or profile and the Historic Preservation Plan as its
charter for the preservation of its historic resources. Once adopted, the Campus Planning
Committee (CPC) will use the Historic Preservation Plan to direct the review of all proposed
modifications to resources identified within the Plan. When designated and potentially
significant historic resources are considered by the CPC, the CPC shall include all available
members of the HPTF to ensure the Historic Preservation Plan is implemented.
Campus Master Plan
3-7
Projected Facility Needs
The HPTF will remain in effect after the completion of the profile and Historic Preservation
Plan. Its status as a task force and its continuing role after the completion of the profile and plan
will be described in the Historic Preservation Plan.
c.
Student Housing
Student housing facilities provide students with an opportunity to experience a campus-focused
lifestyle. For many students, the facilities also serve as a transition between dependent and
independent living. In recent years, more freshman and sophomores have chosen to live on
campus than have juniors and seniors. This trend is due in part to the preference of upperdivision students for greater autonomy than is afforded through dormitory-style housing.
In response to this trend, in 2002 OSU constructed Halsell Hall. This residence hall offers suites
that include individual rooms and bathrooms set back from a central living area. This housing
design and style provides students with both shared living accommodations and autonomy. As
new facilities are constructed, University Housing and Dining Services will further attempt to
diversify housing choices through a variety of living accommodations including co-ops, singleand double-occupancy dormitory rooms, suites, and apartments.
Overall, University Housing and Dining Services provide a total of 3,714 beds (as of September
2003). Of these, 3,398 are in residence halls and 316 are in co-ops. An additional 107 are family
student-housing units (apartments). Over the last five years, OSU has renewed its commitment to
improve the quality and quantity of facilities and to ensure that existing housing facilities are
fully utilized. From 1999 through 2003, the year-end vacancy rate decreased significantly: At the
end of spring term 1999, the vacancy rate was 32 percent, while at the end of spring term 2003,
the vacancy rate was 13 percent. During this same 5-year period, Buxton Hall was renovated and
Halsell Hall was built.
Renovation of Weatherford Hall is currently underway. The College Inn renovation will begin in
the spring of 2005. These projects will contribute additional beds to the campus housing supply
and help ensure that adequate facilities are available for every freshman and all others who
desire to live on campus.
Table 3.7: Student Housing Facilities
Year
1999-2000
2000-2001
2001-2002
2002-2003
2003-2004
2004-2005
2005-2006
End of Planning
Period (2015)
Student
Population
16,201
16,788
18,034
18,789
19,067
19,164
19,352
22,500
Number of
Beds
3,687
3,678
3,330
3,885
3,714
4,000*
4,400**
5,000***
% of Beds to
Population
22.7
21.9
18.5
20.7
19.5
20.9
22.7
22.2
Freshman
Population
3,762
2,828
4,345
4,224
NA
NA
NA
NA
*Renovation of Weatherford Hall
**Renovation/reconstruction of College Inn
***Other new construction
NA: Not Available
3-8
Campus Master Plan
Projected Facility Needs
d.
South Farm Property
OSU currently owns property apart from the main campus. This property, known as South Farm,
is approximately 52 acres and is south of Highway 20/34. The property is mostly unimproved
with the exception of a few remaining agricultural buildings.
The university is interested in establishing a research technology center on the South Farm
property. The center would allow OSU faculty, students, and the business community to pursue
research interests, initiatives, and activities in one main location. The center would help promote
the university’s research and education mission, the community’s economic diversification
efforts, and the state’s goal of capturing Oregon’s technologies for local and statewide economic
development.
Besides a research technology center, other options for development may include sports fields,
open space with interpretive trails, student housing, and other types of university facilities.
Amenities such as sports fields and interpretive trails could help promote a collegiate atmosphere
and provide a venue for additional education.
The South Farm property has a wetland area identified as WC-SQU-W-1 and two riparian areas
identified as WC-SQU-R-6 and R-11. All three areas have been field verified and are included in
the City of Corvallis’ Natural Features Inventory. Development is not anticipated to occur within
the wetland or riparian areas. Any future development of the South Farm property will minimize
disturbance to these areas to the maximum extent practicable.
Previous CMPs have excluded the South Farm property. This CMP, however, has included it and
analyzed it as its own Transportation Analysis Zone (TAZ) in the Base Transportation Model
(see Chapter 6). Due to the property’s distance from the main campus, its requirement for
parking improvements differs from the remainder of campus. For the South Farm property, the
CMP establishes a policy that requires all parking for the development to occur on-site.
3.4
Future Growth
The general concept for growth assumes that student enrollment will increase slowly over time,
as projected by OUS, with a proportional increase of building area for each student. It again
should be noted that comparable land-grant institutions average 500 gross square feet (GSF) per
student; if resources were available, OSU could add approximately 3.1 million GSF of buildings
without enrollment increases.
OSU understands the importance of maintaining the neighborhood character in those
neighborhoods adjacent to OSU. Therefore, adequate parking shall be provided in the future to
ensure that the overall campus parking utilization rate of 85 percent is not exceeded. If it is
exceeded, OSU will begin planning parking areas that are consistent with the CMP and directed
toward locations that maintain a direct and functional travel pattern into and across campus.
Campus Master Plan
3-9
Projected Facility Needs
In addition, when possible, OSU will direct new and replacement development towards the south
and west areas of campus. This will promote an even displacement of development across
campus.
Major land acquisitions are not anticipated within the planning period of the CMP. However, if
land is acquired during the planning period and it is intended for University use, then said
property will be included within the CMP plan boundary within a one-year period of time after
the acquisition date.
a.
Assignable Square Footage by Growth
Table 3.8 uses the following terms:
•
Assignable square footage (ASF). That portion of the gross square footage (GSF) that OSU
uses for instructional, research, support services, athletics, and housing and dining uses. Nonassignable square footages include hallways, stairwells, elevator shafts, restrooms, janitorial
closets, and other building support spaces.
•
Most likely scenario. This growth scenario assumes that the majority of OSU’s development
needs will be met within the CMP planning horizon. This scenario is used for evaluating
anticipated impacts.
•
Full build-out scenario. This growth scenario represents a more optimistic growth trend
with more generous funding available. It represents fulfillment of the majority of identified
needs.
As the table indicates, OSU has approximately 7.6 million gross square feet of existing
development, which includes agricultural buildings and greenhouses, and approximately 4.7
million square feet of assignable square feet. The future ASF in the most likely scenario includes
the addition of 1,577,600 square feet, whereas the future ASF in the full build-out scenario is the
addition of 2,082,300 square feet.
Table 3.8: Assignable Square Footage by Growth
Future Growth
Gross Square Footage
Assignable Square
Footage
Existing
Development
7,675,513
4,733,787
Most
Full Build- Total Most
Likely
Out
Likely
Scenario Scenario
Scenario
2,465,000 3,155,000 10,140,513
1,577,600 2,019,200 6,311,387
Total Full
Build-Out
Scenario
10,830,513
6,752,987
In both the most likely scenario and full build-out scenarios, OSU will strive to maintain at least
a 60 percent ratio of assignable footage to gross square footage, but will seek to maximize the
3-10
Campus Master Plan
Projected Facility Needs
amount of area that is assignable. This will help to promote good space utilization and
efficiencies.
b.
Assignable Percent Square Footage by Sector
Campus building usage is categorized into five use areas: instructional, research, athletics,
housing and dining, and support services. Table 3.9 shows the percentage of existing ASF by
sector for each use.
Table 3.9: Existing Assignable Percent Square Footage by Sector
Sector
Instructional
A
7.90%
B
19.80%
C
25.10%
D
0.00%
E
23.00%
F
0.00%
G
0.00%
H
0.00%
J
0.00%
Average
10.80%
Research Athletics
80.90%
0.00%
51.30%
0.00%
19.30%
0.50%
0.00%
0.00%
34.80%
0.00%
6.90% 82.80%
0.40%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
27.70% 11.90%
Housing Support
and Dining Services
0.00% 11.20%
12.70% 16.20%
15.20% 39.90%
90.80%
9.20%
8.20% 34.00%
0.00% 10.30%
74.00% 25.60%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
28.70% 20.90%
Total
100.00%
100.00%
100.00%
100.00%
100.00%
100.00%
100.00%
0.00%
0.00%
The ASF percentage in each sector varies depending on building type, use, and program needs.
This CMP uses the existing ASF percentage for each sector to establish a baseline that can be
used for future benchmarking of development needs. Table 3.10 summarizes the GSF and ASF
for the most likely scenario.
Table 3.10: Most Likely Scenario by Assignable Square Footage*
Sector
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
J
Existing
GSF
287,272
777,778
4,654,719
325,331
256,918
463,088
746,023
126,921
37,463
Existing
ASF
138,382
429,918
3,167,496
275,019
173,428
241,577
307,968
0
0
Most Likely
Most
Total Most Total Most Existing % Future %
GSF
Likely ASF Likely GSF Likely ASF
ASF
ASF
100,000
395,000
455,000
35,000
30,000
700,000
350,000
50,000
350,000
64,000
252,800
291,200
22,400
19,200
448,000
224,000
32,000
224,000
387,272
1,172,778
5,109,719
360,331
286,918
1,163,088
1,096,023
176,921
387,463
202,382
682,718
3,458,696
297,419
192,628
689,577
531,968
32,000
224,000
48%
55%
68%
85%
68%
52%
41%
0%
0%
52%
58%
68%
83%
67%
59%
49%
18%
58%
* Data as of November 2004
Campus Master Plan
3-11
Projected Facility Needs
Future ASF is consistent with current percentages, but with the following exceptions:
•
Sector A has an existing ASF of 48 percent because many of the buildings are for
agricultural purposes with few classrooms, labs, offices, etc. that qualify as ASF.
•
Sector D has the highest existing ASF: 85 percent. This area includes mostly residence halls
(e.g., Callahan, McNary, Wilson) that typically have high ASF.
•
Sector F has an 8 percent increase in ASF because of future Reser Stadium expansion
projects.
•
Sector G has an 8 percent increase in ASF because OSU plans to incorporate more support
services into the area. Support services traditionally have a lower ASF than the uses
presently in Sector G.
•
Sector H has no existing ASF because the Hilton Garden Inn is privately leased and its
square footage is not inventoried.
•
Sector J also has no existing ASF because of its agricultural buildings, which are no longer in
use.
Table 3.11 summarizes the GSF and ASF for the full build-out scenario. The full build-out ASF
was calculated using the baseline percentage of 64 percent. This percentage is considered a
reasonable average for institutional uses.
Table 3.11: Full Build-Out Scenario by Assignable Square Footage*
Sector
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
J
Existing
GSF
Existing
ASF
287,272
777,778
4,654,719
325,331
256,918
463,088
746,023
126,921
37,463
138,382
429,918
3,167,496
275,019
173,428
241,577
307,968
0
0
Full Build- Full BuildOut GSF Out ASF
250,000
500,000
750,000
35,000
120,000
750,000
350,000
50,000
350,000
160,000
320,000
480,000
22,400
76,800
480,000
224,000
32,000
224,000
Total Full
Total Full Existing %
Build-Out Build-Out
ASF
GSF
ASF
537,272
298,382
48%
1,277,778
749,918
55%
5,404,719
3,647,496
68%
360,331
297,419
85%
376,918
250,228
68%
1,213,088
721,577
52%
1,096,023
531,968
41%
176,921
32,000
0%
387,463
224,000
0%
Future %
ASF
56%
59%
67%
83%
66%
60%
49%
18%
58%
* Data as of November 2004
Both the most likely and full build-out scenarios were modeled for transportation-related
impacts. The resulting ASF percentages were similar.
3-12
Campus Master Plan
Projected Facility Needs
3.5
Condition of Facilities
Many buildings on campus are in need of physical upgrade and maintenance. As noted earlier,
the average age of buildings on campus is 45 years. Buildings of this age typically require
continual maintenance to ensure that they provide an adequate environment for research and
academic activities.
The issue of deferred maintenance will continue to be a challenge for OSU over the CMP’s
planning horizon and well into the future. OSU will continue to work with OUS to ensure that
facilities on campus receive the maintenance they require to address living, safety, and/or
functional concerns.
In addition, to promote a clean image along its district boundary, OSU will prevent buildings and
structures from falling into disrepair.
3.6
Capital Construction
The capital construction budget process originates with the Oregon State Legislature. Every two
years, the legislature determines the amount of state funding that will be available for higher
education capital construction projects, and approves the biennial budget for the Oregon
University System. The Chancellor’s Office then allocates biennial funds to each of the eight
state higher education institutions. The institutions in turn develop a budget for each year of the
biennium. These budgets are based on statewide goals and objectives, institutional priorities,
departmental needs, and directives at each of the institutions. Each institution has its own
process for collecting input from the academic and administrative units.
The OSU Office of Budgets and Fiscal Planning is responsible for projecting, preparing,
monitoring, and evaluating annual budgets for state-appropriated funds at OSU. Each year, the
office distributes annual budget instructions in cooperation with the Vice President of Finance
and Administration and the Vice Provost for Academic Affairs. The instructions provide
information and resources necessary for budget development for a new fiscal year.
The Capital Construction Budget that OSU prepares includes:
•
New building construction proposals,
•
Upgrade of deteriorating general-purpose instructional facilities,
•
Replacement of instructional facilities that do not meet the current or anticipated academic
and research needs of the students, and
•
Maintenance and repair of facilities.
Campus Master Plan
3-13
Projected Facility Needs
a.
Capital Construction Program
Additions and Renovations
Various departments request building additions and renovations to meet their current and
anticipated space needs. Additions and renovations are important to growth because they allow
the departments to update or expand in their current locations.
Major Renovation
Many buildings currently undergoing deferred maintenance and improvements require major
renovation to maintain the initial investment and meet program needs.
New Construction
Most requests for new building construction seek to consolidate program locations and meet the
demand for high-tech instructional facilities. New construction typically focuses on providing
better student services and learning centers or expanding research needs.
Campus Infrastructure Improvements
The growing student population combined with an increasing propensity of students to drive to
campus has increased the demand for campus parking facilities. OSU seeks to mitigate any offsite campus impacts of autos by providing adequate on-site parking in the form of parking
structures and/or surface parking lots.
Infrastructure including streets, electricity, power generation, water, and stormwater and sanitary
sewer systems will be upgraded and expanded as development dictates and in coordination with
the overall development plan for the campus.
OSU will continue to repair and maintain its existing system to ensure that operational
deficiencies are corrected. In addition, OSU will continue to study the feasibility of an oncampus cogeneration plant that would be capable of providing half of the campus’s electrical
needs as well supporting steam and cooling operations.
b.
Capital Construction Projects
During the CMP planning period, it is anticipated that capital construction projects will be
necessary in the following areas:
Research and Academic Facilities
Research and academic facilities must be developed and operated in a manner that attracts and
retains a high caliber of students, faculty, and staff. These new facilities will offer ample
3-14
Campus Master Plan
Projected Facility Needs
research areas and state-of-the-art telecommunications, and serve as an interface between OSU
and businesses for collaborative research and knowledge-based learning.
Student Housing and Dining
Improvements to student housing include renovation of existing residence halls to meet current
student demands and an increase in the number of housing units to meet expanding student
enrollment. OSU has been updating, renovating, and remodeling its existing residence halls.
Recently, OSU added single-suite apartments to its housing portfolio and anticipates the need to
construct housing for 150-250 additional students over the CMP planning horizon. This
supplements the renovation/construction projects currently in the planning or construction stage.
Athletics
The Intercollegiate Athletics program recently constructed an indoor practice field and is
anticipating the construction of an annex to Gill Coliseum and an 8,300-seat expansion to Reser
Stadium. Additional expansions of Reser Stadium are also planned.
Student recreation and intramural sports programs continue to grow in response to student
demand and increased student enrollment. Sports facilities serve three individual but related
programs on campus: Intercollegiate Athletics, Physical Education, and Recreational-Intramural
Sports. Most of the facilities are located south of Jefferson Way between Benton Place and 30th
Street.
Department of Recreational Sports
An addition to Dixon Recreation Center is currently under construction. The addition will
provide an expanded gymnasium, locker, and outdoor program space.
Agricultural Lands
The university has a unique opportunity to use its agricultural lands and agricultural buildings to
enhance the identity of the College of Agricultural Sciences. High quality agricultural facilities
would reflect the importance of agricultural sciences to OSU and the community.
Campus Master Plan
3-15
CAMPUS MASTER PLAN
2004-2015
Chapter 4 – Campus Development
Campus Development
4.0 Campus Development
Future development on the OSU campus will primarily support the enrichment, enhancement,
and improvement of academic and research facilities and activities.
For planning purposes, the CMP divides the campus into nine development sectors. The sector
approach allows for new development based on an area’s existing development (buildings and
impervious surface areas) and the anticipated needs of the campus as a whole. Each sector is
allotted a maximum square footage development allocation and a minimum open space amount
to ensure that future development preserves the sector’s open space character. This approach also
provides flexibility in that exact building locations can be established at the time of
development. Flexibility to site buildings based on programmatic and research needs has become
increasingly important in recent years.
Table 4.1 shows the maximum allowable building square footage for each sector. The maximum
future allocation was determined based on interviews with university officials about future
needs, academic and research trends, and an assessment of known or pending expansion
opportunities and development projects.
Table 4.1: Building Square Footage by Sector
Sector
Existing/Approval
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
J
Total
287,272
777,778
4,654,719
325,331
256,918
463,088
746,023
126,921
37,463
7,675,513
Maximum Future
Allocation
250,000
500,000
750,000
35,000
120,000
750,000
350,000
50,000
350,000
3,155,000
Total
537,272
1,277,778
5,404,719
360,331
376,918
1,213,088
1,096,023
176,921
387,463
10,830,513
Regarding open space, CMP Policy 2.7.1 establishes that a minimum of 50 percent of open space
shall be maintained on campus. Open space can consist of lawn areas, landscape beds, and
pedestrian amenities such as plazas, courtyards, decks, sidewalks, and recreation fields,
agricultural fields, or other non-developed areas. Both “green” spaces and hardscape areas such
as pavement are considered open space because they allow the community to co-mingle or
provide an area of respite. Green and hardscape areas can be a building amenity or a point of
interest on campus.
Campus Master Plan
4-1
Campus Development
Table 4.2: Open Space Requirement by Sector
Sector
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
J
Total
Existing
Percent of
Open Space Sector Area Sector in Open
Future Minimum
(Sq.Ft.)
(Sq. Ft.)
Space
Open Space (Sq. Ft.)
2,791,263
3,358,166
83%
2,619,369
1,783,775
3,129,255
57%
1,032,654
3,980,931
6,863,033
58%
2,470,692
1,267,652
1,953,994
65%
1,191,936
2,335,426
2,870,819
81%
2,210,531
759,968
2,062,341
37%
412,468
796,464
1,360,414
59%
544,165
714,317
1,030,317
69%
659,402
2,238,667
2,276,565
98%
1,798,486
16,668,463
24,904,904
67%
12,452,452*
Percent to
Remain in
Open Space
78%
33%
36%
61%
77%
20%
40%
64%
79%
50%
* The total future minimum open space, based on the sum of each sector minimum, is 12,939.703 square feet. The
12,452,452 square feet in this table represents the minimum campus-wide requirement of 50 percent. If a sector’s
minimum requirement is not met, modification procedures (Chapter 8) must be followed, provided that the overall
campus standard of 50 percent is maintained.
Besides the maximum development allocation and minimum open space standard, future
development in each sector shall also adhere to the relevant sector development policies in this
chapter. Sector policies are more area-specific than CMP policies and will help maintain
consistency throughout the planning area.
4-2
Campus Master Plan
Campus Development
Figure 4.1: Aerial View of OSU
Campus Master Plan
4-3
Campus Development
Figure 4.2: OSU Campus Sector Map
4-4
Campus Master Plan
Campus Development
4.1
General Development Policies
Table 4.3: Total Master Plan Area
Sector Area
Overall Campus Master Plan Area
Area in Square Feet
24,904,904
(569.82 acres)
7,675,513
Existing/Approved Development1
Existing Impervious Surface
OSU Building Footprint
OSU IOTB2 Footprint
Non OSU Building Footprint
Non OSU IOTB Footprint
OSU Streets3
OSU Parking3
Public Streets
Total Existing Impervious Surface
Percent of Impervious Surface
Future Development
1. Includes all buildings and IOTBs gross square feet.
2. IOTB = Improvements other than buildings
3. Includes gravel areas.
3,247,716
90,930
213,286
18,058
1,124,808
3,142,321
399,322
8,236,441
33%
3,155,000
The following general development policies provide additional direction for future development.
These general development policies supplement the CMP Principles and Policies in Chapter 2.
General Policies
4.1.1
Establish a maximum development allocation and a minimum open space standard for
each sector.
4.1.2
Ensure that sector development is consistent with the sector-specific policies in this
CMP.
4.1.3
Preserve the historic character of existing buildings and incorporate historic values into
each building renovation or expansion project as much as practicable.
4.1.4
Organize buildings along streets and develop quadrangles or other usable open space.
Each building should have a unique identity whenever possible. Buildings shall be
connected via links (e.g., sidewalks, bridges, tunnels, etc.) that are underground, at grade,
or above grade. The connecting links should not be the dominant feature.
4.1.5
Ensure that development along the campus boundaries is compatible with existing
adjacent uses. A neighborhood transition area shall be established in which building
heights are reduced in the vicinity of the campus boundaries.
Campus Master Plan
4-5
Campus Development
4.1.6
4.1.7
Design new buildings and uses such that architectural continuity is provided across
campus.
Design buildings that are used for academic and research activities for long term use (100
years or more).
4.1.8
Ensure that development projects are consistent with the principles, policies, and
development and design standards in this CMP. To this end, Facilities Services and its
departments shall oversee and coordinate development and construction projects.
4.1.9
Design transportation, pedestrian and bicycle connections consistent with the City’s
transportation plan, comprehensive plan, land development code, Corvallis Standard
Construction Specifications, and the CMP TIP to promote safe and convenient access
into and across campus.
4.1.10 Develop and implement architectural and landscape architectural guidelines to reinforce
the relationship among buildings, streets, and open space. Create continuity in the mass,
scale, materials, and surrounding landscape of campus buildings.
4.1.11 Ensure that existing and new development recognizes and supports the established
cultural centers as expressed in the Cultural Centers at Oregon State University
Covenant, Statement of Vision and Charter Commitment, confirmed on January 22, 2002
with any future adopted updates.
4.1.12 Property acquired and intended for University use shall be incorporated into the CMP
boundary within one year after the acquisition date of said property.
4.1.13 Development within the transition areas around OSU shall incorporate OSU design
criteria for architectural standards, and be compatible with the adjacent neighborhoods as
it relates to height, scale, and building materials.
4.1.14 OSU shall ensure that adequate mitigation of the identified intersections within the Base
Transportation Model (BTM), or its update, that drop below an acceptable level of
service as described in the City of Corvallis’ Transportation System Plan (TSP) are
mitigated in accordance with the mitigation measures outlined in the most recent CMP
annual monitoring report or the CMP’s Transportation Improvement Plan.
4.1.15 OSU shall complete the mitigation described in Policy 4.1.14 within one year of when
said mitigation measures are identified or in accordance with the development proposal
that is projected to impact the intersection beyond an acceptable level.
4.1.16 If mitigation from projected development is not completed in accordance with said
development, then the project will either be delayed until such a time that mitigation can
occur in accordance with the most recent CMP annual monitoring report or CMP’s
Transportation Improvement Plan, or the project will be redesigned in a manner that does
not impact the transportation system beyond acceptable levels.
4-6
Campus Master Plan
Campus Development
Irish Bend Covered Bridge
Figure 4.3: Irish Bend Covered Bridge
Campus Master Plan
4-7
Campus Development
Figure 4.4: Map of Sector A
4-8
Campus Master Plan
Campus Development
4.2
Sector Descriptions
a.
Sector A — West 35th
Table 4.4: Sector A Area Calculations
Sector Area
Area in Square Feet
3,358,166
(77.09 acres)
1
Existing/Approved Development
Existing Impervious Surface
OSU Building Footprint
2
OSU IOTB Footprint
Non OSU Building Footprint
Non OSU IOTB Footprint
3
OSU Streets
3
OSU Parking
Public Streets
Total Existing Impervious Surface
Percent of Impervious Surface
Future Development
1. Includes all buildings and IOTBs gross square feet.
2. IOTB = Improvements other than buildings
3. Includes gravel areas.
287,272
161,080
39,977
87,172
8,715
93,618
141,771
34,570
566,903
17%
250,000
Sector A is less developed than many other sectors on campus. This sector is visually dominated
by agricultural fields and the adjacent rural landscape. A portion of Oak Creek traverses the
southern portion of Sector A.
Sector A supports research activities facilities (e.g., Hinsdale Wave Research Lab),
Environmental Protection Agency offices, and agricultural fields. It has the potential to support
additional research facilities, student housing, campus support services, and other university
services and facilities.
Future development in Sector A will serve as the transition between OSU and the agricultural
and rural landscape. This development may incorporate transitional features or design elements
(open space areas, height limits, landscape, building placement, etc.) to enhance compatibility
with existing uses. Future development in Sector A may trigger improvements to 35th Street. The
35th Street area should include, through the use of design elements, a transition between the city
low-density development and potentially higher density OSU uses. Parking in this area should be
carefully managed to minimize impacts to the nearby residential neighborhood.
Management of Oak Creek, the floodplain, and riparian area shall be included in future
development scenarios. A city-OSU Oak Creek management agreement will be developed when
new construction is proposed in the vicinity of the creek. This agreement shall be consistent with
other Oak Creek management agreements.
Campus Master Plan
4-9
Campus Development
Other actions to enhance Oak Creek should be undertaken in the future. These actions may
include the following:
•
Recognize Oak Creek and its associated floodplain as an educational resource.
•
Consider decommissioning and reclaiming the OSU recycling/storage area. Reclamation
activities could include riparian forest plantings and potential floodplain reconnections.
Plantings could include conifers and use of a successional planting approach to provide rapid
cover for later-succession tree species and deter establishment of invasive plants.
•
Identify the disturbed portions of Oak Creek riparian areas as potential candidates for
restoration of floodplain connectivity. This would require further hydrology/engineering
study.
•
Remove the Himalayan blackberry and other exotic species that dominate the margins of
riparian areas and wetlands, and replace with native willows, alder, cottonwood, and/or
western red cedar. The usage by terrestrial species of certain stream and wetland areas along
Oak Creek suffers from limited habitat structural complexity, poor connectivity to upland
habitats, and the degraded quality of certain stream segments and wetlands.
•
Remove trash and debris dumped along Oak Creek and revegetate disturbed areas once
cleared. Develop an educational program to discourage future littering and dumping.
•
Remove buildings, other structures, and impervious surfaces in the riparian area. Revegetate
disturbed areas with native plants.
•
Restore hardened banks (rubble and riprap) in certain reach segments using bioengineering
techniques with native plant materials. This would require additional study; such a proposal
might be appropriate if bank enhancements are already planned (e.g., for floodplain
restoration work or perhaps in conjunction with the Oak Creek Task Force’s proposed bridge
removal).
•
Identify and evaluate water quality characteristics of piped and concentrated surface
stormwater discharges into Oak Creek (to the extent data is available or studies are planned).
The creek and associated wetlands are susceptible to potential water quality degradation and
nutrient loading from road, university, and agricultural runoff. Identify appropriate and
feasible remedial actions to treat or disconnect discharges that may contribute to water
quality degradation.
•
Evaluate existing recreation, education, scientific research and monitoring activities, and
potential opportunities to incorporate such activities into any proposed enhancement work.
4-10
Campus Master Plan
Campus Development
Sector A Policies
4.2.1.a
Incorporate transitional design elements (height limits, landscaping, building
placement, etc.) between city low-density development and potentially higher density
OSU uses along the northern edge of the sector.
4.2.2.a
Recognize that the sector’s future development may include agricultural facilities,
research facilities, student housing, campus support services, and other university
services and facilities.
4.2.3.a
Enter into a City-OSU management agreement consistent with existing management
agreements when development occurs in the vicinity of Oak Creek. Minimize
development-related impacts to the Oak Creek riparian area and, over time, enhance the
riparian corridor.
4.2.4.a
Continue to encourage federal, state, and private research activities in the sector.
4.2.5.a
Improve 35th Street consistent with the City-OSU 35th Street Improvement Agreement
and in a manner that improves access to and identifies the university.
4.2.6.a
Improve Campus Way, Jefferson Way, and Washington Way to strengthen the
east/west connection that links research, forestry, and agricultural areas to the campus
core.
4.2.7.a
Preserve agricultural lands west of 35th Street, outside of the city limits, in recognition
of the university’s research, instructional, aesthetic, and open space values.
4.2.8.a
Enhance the image of the agricultural facilities to better reflect OSU’s role as a premier
agricultural school.
4.2.9.a
Develop agricultural facilities to emphasize the distinct and important function that
agriculture serves on the campus. Animal facilities and agricultural support functions
should be consolidated in an orderly and attractive “farmstead” at the western end of
Campus Way, forming a gateway to the open fields beyond. To accomplish the
consolidation, scattered and deteriorating agricultural buildings should be replaced.
4.2.10.a Ensure that a minimum of 78 percent of land in Sector A remains as open space.
Campus Master Plan
4-11
Campus Development
Figure 4.5: Map of Sector B
4-12
Campus Master Plan
Campus Development
b.
Sector B — West Campus
Table 4.5: Sector B Area Calculations
Sector Area
Area in Square Feet
3,129,255
(71.84 acres)
Existing/Approved Development1
Existing Impervious Surface
OSU Building Footprint
OSU IOTB2 Footprint
Non OSU Building Footprint
Non OSU IOTB Footprint
OSU Streets3
OSU Parking3
Public Streets
Total Existing Impervious Surface
Percent of Impervious Surface
Future Development
1. Includes all buildings and IOTBs gross square feet.
2. IOTB = Improvements other than buildings
3. Includes gravel areas.
777,778
437,205
13,512
100,236
8,117
129,191
590,623
66,596
1,345,480
43%
500,000
The uses in Sector B are more mixed than those in Sector A. Sector B includes U.S. Department
of Agriculture (USDA) offices, greenhouses, research labs and facilities, academic facilities,
materials storage areas, agricultural uses, and student housing. The northern portion of Sector B
is adjacent to privately owned residences.
An intramural sports field in Sector B provides visual and recreational open space. The field is
adjacent to a residence hall and thus provides students with an opportunity for recreation. Future
development in Sector B, and in other sectors that have recreational fields adjacent to more
dense development, will most likely result in development of these open spaces. Future
development shall strive to incorporate open space into its design and ensure that recreational
opportunities are provided elsewhere on campus.
Future development in Sector B shall incorporate transitional design elements adjacent to the
nearby residential uses and minimize through-traffic impacts. Potential uses may include student
housing, research and academic labs and facilities, campus support services, and other university
services and facilities.
Sector B Policies
4.2.1.b
Organize research expansion primarily along 35th Street and between Campus Way and
Washington Way, west of 30th Street.
Campus Master Plan
4-13
Campus Development
4.2.2.b
Support the university’s agricultural mission by encouraging the location of agricultural
research facilities on the west side of campus.
4.2.3.b
Improve 35th Street consistent with the OSU-city 35th Street Agreement and in a
manner that improves access to and the identity of the university.
4.2.4.b
Ensure that agricultural facilities are the western anchor and extension of the graduate
research, undergraduate teaching, and other university facilities will develop in the core
area blocks between 30th Street and 35th Street.
4.2.5.b
Develop agricultural facilities to emphasize the distinct and important function that
agriculture serves on the campus. Scattered and deteriorating agricultural buildings and
lands west of 30th Street should be consolidated and updated.
4.2.6.b
Ensure that a minimum of 33 percent of land in Sector B remains as open space.
4-14
Campus Master Plan
Campus Development
Peavy Field
Figure 4.6: Peavy Field
Campus Master Plan
4-15
Campus Development
Figure 4.7: Map of Sector C
4-16
Campus Master Plan
Campus Development
c.
Sector C — Campus Core
Table 4.6: Sector C Area Calculations
Sector Area
Area in Square Feet
6,863,033
(157.55 acres)
Existing/Approved Development1
Existing Impervious Surface
OSU Building Footprint
OSU IOTB2 Footprint
Non OSU Building Footprint
Non OSU IOTB Footprint
OSU Streets3
OSU Parking3
Public Streets
Total Existing Impervious Surface
Percent of Impervious Surface
Future Development
1. Includes all buildings and IOTBs gross square feet.
2. IOTB = Improvements other than buildings
3. Includes gravel areas.
4,654,719
1,460,841
5,865
0
0
529,326
829,010
57,060
2,882,102
42%
750,000
Sector C is OSU’s campus core and academic center. The sector is characterized by buildings,
quads, open space, pedestrian sidewalks, and paths.
Future development in Sector C shall be compatible with the existing uses and character, and
may include academic or academic-related uses, research facilities, open space areas, campus
support services, student housing, recreation facilities, and other university services and
facilities. Development in this sector will occur through the “in filling” in areas such as parking
lots and/or redevelopment of existing buildings or spaces.
To maximize ease of use by the majority of the campus community, Sector C needs to be
intensively developed. Redevelopment through building expansion, remodeling, or demolition
and reconstruction will allow a more resource-efficient land use pattern to emerge.
Sector C’s historic buildings pose a design challenge for the integration of new buildings. New
buildings must try to capture the spirit and energy of modern construction, yet respect traditional
existing building forms and contribute to a usable, harmonious, and aesthetically pleasing
campus. Sector C’s parking demands are an additional challenge. Despite these challenges, OSU
is committed to retaining the charm and attractiveness of Sector C and the campus as a whole.
The existing Memorial Union and Library quads shall be retained as open space. New
development will be designed with pedestrians in mind by providing good connectivity and open
space enhancements such as courtyards, atriums, and porches. To the extent that new
development projects remove existing parking stalls or lots, the project sponsors will be required
Campus Master Plan
4-17
Campus Development
to provide a commensurate amount of parking. This most likely will include underground
parking, parking within structures, or parking in areas outside of Sector C.
Other redevelopment efforts in Sector C include the eventual removal and relocation of the
physical plant shops behind the Kerr Administration building and the renovation and
redevelopment of Snell Hall. Removal and relocation of the physical plant shops will provide
additional space for campus core uses and also allow for the potential realignment of
Washington Way.
Sector C Policies
4.2.1.c
Ensure that buildings in the campus core are designed so that each building has an
individual identity, is oriented toward the street and, where possible, situated along
quads. Areas within the campus core will provide a pedestrian zone free of major
automobile traffic.
4.2.2.c
Concentrate on providing instructional and related facilities in Sector C. This includes
classrooms, teaching laboratories, faculty and administrative offices, libraries, student
union facilities, and recreational and performance facilities with instructional functions.
4.2.3.c
Locate related instructional facilities such that they can be reached within a 10-minute
walk (approximately 2,200 feet).
4.2.4.c
Increase the density of the campus core when the supply of available building sites in
the core is exhausted. Ultimately, this can be accomplished by replacing recreation
fields and parking areas with new buildings and pedestrian quads.
4.2.5.c
Develop a new quad in the Kelley Engineering Center block. This quad should have
clearly defined and interconnected pedestrian corridors and a distinct quality that
provides a space around which future buildings can be organized.
4.2.6.c
Ensure that a minimum of 36 percent of land in Sector C remains as open space.
4-18
Campus Master Plan
Campus Development
Benton Hall
Figure 4.8: OSU’s Oldest Building, Benton Hall, Built in 1889
Campus Master Plan
4-19
Campus Development
Figure 4.9: Map of Sector D
4-20
Campus Master Plan
Campus Development
d.
Sector D — Lower Campus
Table 4.7: Sector D Area Calculations
Sector Area
Area in Square Feet
1,953,994
(44.86 acres)
Existing/Approved Development1
Existing Impervious Surface
OSU Building Footprint
OSU IOTB2 Footprint
Non OSU Building Footprint
Non OSU IOTB Footprint
OSU Streets3
OSU Parking3
Public Streets
Total Existing Impervious Surface
Percent of Impervious Surface
Future Development
1. Includes all buildings and IOTBs gross square feet.
2. IOTB = Improvements other than buildings
3. Includes gravel areas.
325,331
117,617
2,553
0
0
135,633
326,634
103,905
686,342
35%
35,000
Sector D, also known as the lower campus, is characterized by a large expanse of open space that
provides visual relief from surrounding higher density development. This sector has a series of
portals at key entry points as well as pedestrian sidewalks and paths that connect to the rest of
campus and to the community. The sector also hosts a variety of community events.
Some areas in Sector D act as an interface between OSU and the surrounding community. These
areas also provide visitors with their first impression of OSU. The visual appearance and
functionality (e.g., parking, traffic circulation, impacts on adjacent residential areas) could be
further improved with new development. Although some of Sector D will remain as open space,
future development may include a visitor information center, president’s residence, student
housing, parking, and other university services and facilities.
Sector D Policies
4.2.1.d
Site all new development to minimize disturbance to existing open space to the
maximum extent practicable.
4.2.2.d
Recognize that Madison Avenue shall continue to be developed as a pedestrian link
between OSU and the Willamette River. Development in this area shall be compatible
with and enhance the abutting land uses and allow for the area’s continued use for
cultural and civic purposes.
Campus Master Plan
4-21
Campus Development
4.2.3.d
Explore the feasibility of locating the university president’s residence and other
welcoming facilities to Sector D.
4.2.4.d
Ensure that a minimum of 61 percent of land in Sector D remains as open space.
4-22
Campus Master Plan
Campus Development
Figure 4.10: Map of Sector E
Campus Master Plan
4-23
Campus Development
e.
Sector E — Southwest Campus
Table 4.8: Sector E Area Calculations
Sector Area
Area in Square Feet
2,870,819
(65.9 acres)
Existing/Approved Development1
Existing Impervious Surface
OSU Building Footprint
OSU IOTB2 Footprint
Non OSU Building Footprint
Non OSU IOTB Footprint
OSU Streets3
OSU Parking3
Public Streets
Total Existing Impervious Surface
Percent of Impervious Surface
Future Development
1. Includes all buildings and IOTBs gross square feet.
2. IOTB = Improvements other than buildings
3. Includes gravel areas.
256,918
209,499
10,860
0
0
39,718
244,339
30,977
535,393
19%
120,000
Sector E is similar to Sector A in terms of its predominant agricultural character and existing
low-density development. Sector E consists of the College of Veterinary Medicine, Oak Creek
Building, a housing and dining services facility, agricultural fields, and related agricultural uses.
Oak Creek traverses the southern portion of the sector with agricultural uses flanking both sides
of the creek.
Future development in this sector will be greatly influenced by consideration of Oak Creek, its
riparian area, and the associated floodplain. Focusing development away from the creek and
outside of the floodplain will minimize impacts. In addition, a city-OSU management agreement
for the Oak Creek area has been executed to regulate activities within the floodplain. Other
actions may be considered that address the management of Oak Creek in this sector. These
actions include:
•
Removal of the irrigation diversion dam located east of 35th Street near the apiary buildings.
Removal could benefit sensitive fish within the study area. OSU has discussed this action
with the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife. Given the many technical considerations,
detailed studying and monitoring would be required to establish the feasibility and scope for
the dam removal.
•
Evaluation of existing recreation, education, scientific research and monitoring activities, and
potential opportunities to incorporate such activities into any proposed enhancement work.
4-24
Campus Master Plan
Campus Development
Future potential development in Sector E may include veterinary and agricultural research labs,
agricultural science labs and support services, university facilities and services, interpretive trails
along Oak Creek in conjunction with education and management programs for the creek, and
other campus support services. Another element of future development is a multi-use path, south
of Washington Way, that connects this sector with destinations to the east and west.
Sector E Policies
4.2.1.e
Improve east-west pedestrian and bike connectivity along Washington Way concurrent
with development projects.
4.2.2.e
Improve 35th Street consistent with the City-OSU 35th Street Improvement Agreement
and in a manner that improves access to and the identity of the research and agricultural
functions of the University.
4.2.3.e
Improve 30th Street between Western Boulevard and Washington Way concurrent with
abutting development.
4.2.4.e
Minimize development impacts to Oak Creek riparian drainage way and take steps
toward enhancing the riparian corridor.
4.2.5.e
Ensure that a minimum of 77 percent of land in Sector E remains as open space.
Campus Master Plan
4-25
Campus Development
Richardson Hall
Figure 4.11: Richardson Hall
4-26
Campus Master Plan
Campus Development
Figure 4.12: Map of Sector F
Campus Master Plan
4-27
Campus Development
f.
Sector F — Reser Stadium and Gill Coliseum
Table 4.9: Sector F Area Calculations
Sector Area
Area in Square Feet
2,062,341
(47.34 acres)
Existing/Approved Development1
Existing Impervious Surface
OSU Building Footprint
OSU IOTB2 Footprint
Non OSU Building Footprint
Non OSU IOTB Footprint
OSU Streets3
OSU Parking3
Public Streets
Total Existing Impervious Surface
Percent of Impervious Surface
Future Development
1. Includes all buildings and IOTBs gross square feet.
2. IOTB = Improvements other than buildings
3. Includes gravel areas.
463,088
555,220
1,709
0
0
134,334
610,702
408
1,302,373
63%
750,000
Sector F is the athletic precinct of the campus and is visually dominated by Reser Stadium, its
support facilities (Merrit Truax Indoor Practice Facility, the Valley Football Center, etc.),
parking, and Gill Coliseum.
Future development in Sector F shall be compatible with and complimentary to the existing
athletic facilities. Development will include a multi-phased expansion of Reser Stadium, an
addition to Gill Coliseum called the Gill Annex, an east-west multi-use path connection along
Washington Way, north-south pedestrian and road improvements on 26th Street and 30th Street,
and additional university-related services and uses.
The athletic venues in this sector create a window through which the outside world can view
OSU. The overall quality and attractiveness of the campus and the view of the surrounding area
has the potential to leave visitors with a positive impression of OSU. Further development in the
area could include the addition of an information/visitor’s kiosk on 26th Street and other portal
improvements that identify entry to the OSU campus.
Oak Creek traverses the southern boundary of the sector. Recent improvements to the Reser
Stadium parking lot have included a bio-swale, an on-site water detention facility, and some
bank restoration work. Additional restoration work along the banks and stream corridor will
occur over time.
4-28
Campus Master Plan
Campus Development
Sector F Policies
4.2.1.f
Continue to promote OSU intercollegiate athletics and provide facilities that allow
OSU to be competitive on a national level.
4.2.2.f
Support Reser Stadium expansion projects and other enhancement projects of athletic
facilities.
4.2.3.f
Work with nearby property owners to maximize opportunities for the efficient use of
facilities. One such example is the 2002 agreement with the Benton County
Fairgrounds for use of their parking facilities on football game days.
4.2.4.f
Continue to minimize development impacts to Oak Creek and, over time, enhance the
riparian corridor.
4.2.5.f
Phase improvements to 26th Street and 30th Street to minimize disruption to the campus
and surrounding community.
4.2.6.f
Develop an improved entryway into the campus at 26th Street and Western Boulevard.
4.2.7.f
Ensure that a minimum of 20 percent of land in Sector F remains as open space.
Campus Master Plan
4-29
Campus Development
OSU Football Game at Reser Stadium
Figure 4.13: Reser Stadium on a Football Game Day
4-30
Campus Master Plan
Campus Development
Figure 4.14: Map of Sector G
Campus Master Plan
4-31
Campus Development
g.
Sector G — LaSells and Alumni Center
Table 4.10: Sector G Area Calculations
Sector Area
Area in Square Feet
1,360,414
(31.23 acres)
Existing/Approved Development1
Existing Impervious Surface
OSU Building Footprint
OSU IOTB2 Footprint
Non OSU Building Footprint
Non OSU IOTB Footprint
OSU Streets3
OSU Parking3
Public Streets
Total Existing Impervious Surface
Percent of Impervious Surface
Future Development
1. Includes all buildings and IOTBs gross square feet.
2. IOTB = Improvements other than buildings
3. Includes gravel areas.
746,023
268,531
3,931
0
0
62,988
169,354
59,146
563,950
41%
350,000
Sector G includes the CH2M Hill Alumni Center, LaSells Stewart Center, student housing and
dining facilities, Centro Cultural Cesar Chavez, university support services, and a mixture of
other uses. Events, conferences, seminars, and other activities at the CH2M Hill Alumni Center
and LaSells Stewart Center draw visitors from local, regional, national, and international areas.
Future development in Sector G may provide some facilities for this extended market. Such
development could include enhancement of the LaSells Stewart Center, additional conferencing
facilities, or other types of facilities that appeal to the local and regional community. Other
anticipated development in this sector includes expansion of the CH2M Hill Alumni Center,
additional student housing and dining facilities, and other university services and facilities.
Nearby arterials and collector roadways provide access to Sector G. A parking structure will be
located immediately east of Gill Coliseum and will be constructed as part of the Reser Stadium
expansion project. This facility will provide adequate parking for anticipated uses in this sector
and for the greater campus community.
Sector G Policies
4.2.1.g
Develop facilities to promote educational, recreational, artistic, and cultural exchanges
between OSU and the local community.
4.2.2.g
Provide new campus housing facilities.
4.2.3.g
Develop an improved entryway into the campus at 26th Street and Western Boulevard.
4-32
Campus Master Plan
Campus Development
4.2.4.g
Phase the timing of improvement to 26th Street with other projects to minimize
disruption to the campus and surrounding community.
4.2.5.g
Ensure that a minimum of 40 percent of land in Sector G remains as open space.
Campus Master Plan
4-33
Campus Development
Figure 4.15: Map of Sector H
4-34
Campus Master Plan
Campus Development
h.
Sector H — Far South Campus
Table 4.11: Sector H Area Calculations
Sector Area
Area in Square Feet
1,030,317
(23.65 acres)
Existing/Approved Development1
Existing Impervious Surface
OSU Building Footprint
OSU IOTB2 Footprint
Non OSU Building Footprint
Non OSU IOTB Footprint
OSU Streets3
OSU Parking3
Public Streets
Total Existing Impervious Surface
Percent of Impervious Surface
Future Development
1. Includes all buildings and IOTBs gross square feet.
2. IOTB = Improvements other than buildings
3. Includes gravel areas.
126,921
976
11,372
25,878
1,226
0
229,888
46,660
316,000
31%
50,000
Sector H includes softball and soccer fields, an intramural sports field, gravel parking, and a
newly constructed Hilton Garden Inn. Western Boulevard, an arterial street, abuts Sector H to
the north and provides direct access to these uses. The presence of the Hilton Garden Inn in close
proximity to the intercollegiate athletic facilities, CH2M Hill Alumni Center, Gill Coliseum, and
LaSells Stewart Center provides the university an opportunity to extend its outreach for hosting
events.
Future development in Sector H will include enhancement of the athletic facilities and other
improvements such as sports field night lighting, updated signage, paved parking, and fencing,
along with construction of other university facilities and services.
Sector H Policies
4.2.1.h
Evaluate the feasibility of developing an Intercollegiate Athletic sports complex and
recreational facility for educational and intramural sports. Such a facility would unify
and consolidate athletic opportunities on campus.
4.2.2.h
Continue to upgrade and improve athletic facilities with night lighting, signage,
fencing, paved parking, etc.
4.2.3.h
Monitor safety of pedestrian travel from the Hilton Garden Inn to campus venues. If
safety issues arise, work with the appropriate agencies to promote safety.
4.2.4.h
Ensure that a minimum of 64 percent of land in Sector H remains as open space.
Campus Master Plan
4-35
Campus Development
Figure 4.16: Map of Sector J
4-36
Campus Master Plan
Campus Development
j.
Sector J — South Farm
Note: There is no Sector I or section “I.”
Table 4.12: Sector J Area Calculations
Sector Area
Area in Square Feet
2,276,565
(50.36 acres)
Existing/Approved Development1
Existing Impervious Surface
OSU Building Footprint
OSU IOTB2 Footprint
Non OSU Building Footprint
Non OSU IOTB Footprint
OSU Streets3
OSU Parking3
Public Streets
Total Existing Impervious Surface
Percent of Impervious Surface
Future Development
1. Includes all buildings and IOTBs gross square feet.
2. IOTB = Improvements other than buildings
3. Includes gravel areas.
37,463
36,747
1,151
0
0
0
0
0
37,898
2%
350,000
Sector J, also known as South Farm, is not contiguous with the other sectors and is located south
of Highway 20/34 and west of Brook Lane Drive. The sector is mostly unimproved except for
some remaining agricultural buildings related to poultry and mink shelters.
The City of Corvallis Comprehensive Plan designates Sector J as Public Institutional. The sector
is zoned as AG-OS (Agriculture Open Space). One component of implementing the CMP
includes the review and approval of a Development District Change to change the sector’s
zoning from AG-OS to OSU District.
Future development in Sector J may include research facilities that can be used for single- or
multi-discipline research activities. The facilities may include multiple buildings organized into
a research park as well as some other research and education-related services and businesses.
These facilities will promote OSU’s research and educational mission, the community’s
economic diversification efforts, and the state’s goal of capturing Oregon’s technologies to
promote local and statewide economic development. These goals will be achieved through
collaborative research and business partnerships.
Sector J development will follow the principles and policies of the CMP, including any
development that occurs under a lease with the university. Other uses that potentially could be
integrated with the research park concept or developed independently include housing,
intramural sports fields, interpretative trails, and other university services and facilities.
Campus Master Plan
4-37
Campus Development
Sector J is impacted by floodplain, wetlands, access limitations, and the proximity of public
school facilities. Development of this site will require improvements sensitive to compatibility
concerns and the site’s natural features. The sector provides a unique opportunity to integrate
open space into the development scenario. In terms of access improvements, there may be
opportunities to partner with adjacent property owners to improve site access.
Sector J Policies
4.2.1.j
Ensure that development recognizes the site’s significant natural features and
incorporates concepts of sustainability and environmental sensitivity.
4.2.2.j
Provide on-site parking for all development in accordance with the provisions of the
Corvallis Land Development Code.
4.2.3.j
Evaluate the feasibility of developing a research park. As appropriate, also consider
interpretive trails, intramural sports fields, student housing, and other university-related
facilities and services.
4.2.4.j
Explore the possibility of working with adjacent property owners to provide street or
other access improvements in Sector J.
4.2.5.j
A major adjustment to the CMP shall be required when the square footage of
development exceeds the amount of square footage modeled in the Base Transportation
Model (i.e., 231,100) by more than ten percent (i.e., 254,100).
4.2.6.j
An updated Traffic Impact Analysis of Sector J that includes the existing
development and proposed development shall be completed annually as part of the
Campus Master Plan Monitoring Report.
4.2.7.j
A Traffic Impact Analysis shall be submitted to the City for those projects not reviewed
under the annual report.
4.2.8.j
Appropriate mitigation measures recommended within a Traffic Impact Analysis to
minimize the impact from traffic and parking as a result of proposed development
within Sector J shall be completed in accordance with the proposed development.
4.2.9.j
Ensure that a minimum of 79 percent of land in Sector J remains as open space.
4-38
Campus Master Plan
CAMPUS MASTER PLAN
2004-2015
Chapter 5 - Design Guidelines
Design Guidelines
5.0 Design Guidelines Overview
This Campus Master Plan (CMP) includes
architectural design guidelines to ensure a
consistent campus look and to help provide
direction for future building and expansions.
The design guidelines described in the CMP
and within the OSU District (Chapter 8)
include provisions to create a cohesive
development across campus and to create
compatible development along the campus
edge where it abuts adjacent neighborhoods.
OSU acknowledges that its development has
the potential to adversely impact adjacent
neighborhoods. It is therefore crucial for the
Figure 5.1: Waldo Hall
character, vitality, and function of those
neighborhoods to be reviewed during any subsequent update to the CMP to ensure adequate
provisions in the form of CMP policies, design criteria, or OSU District code language are
maintained or developed.
OSU has established a transition area (along its northern boundary) that includes specific design
guidelines and criteria to maintain and protect the vitality of those neighborhoods adjacent to
OSU’s campus. This transition area provides a measure of protection of previous development
standards, such as Section 3.36.04.02(3) - “Structures within 400ft of the district boundary shall
have a minimum setback from a property line twice the height of the structure, except when
abutting a public street”. Any future CMP update, or updates to development standards will
always be reviewed with neighbors and include a transition area in some form to provide
neighbors with long term assurances that OSU’s pattern of development will be compatible with
the adjacent neighborhoods.
Over time, construction should visually and physically reinforce campus organization and unity.
The predominant style of campus architecture is generally defined as Collegiate Classical
Revival Style. These design guidelines are an attempt to ensure that new buildings reflect the
vitality of modern construction, yet maintain unity with existing older architecture. Note that this
is not to imply that the appearance of older buildings should be recreated in new construction.
Rather, the new buildings should reflect the spirit of a modern institution within the architectural
pallet of the existing classical elements on campus. This presents an interesting architectural
challenge.
The CMP requires that associated site development, such as landscaping, utility extensions,
required parking, etc., is provided at the time of construction and adheres to the design guidelines
in this chapter.
Campus Master Plan
5-1
Design Guidelines
5.1
The Design Process
a.
The Coordination Process
New construction, remodeling, or renovation projects must be coordinated with Facilities
Services (or the department so designated by Facilities Services with this responsibility). This
coordination will allow Facilities Services staff (e.g., planning, engineering, operations, and
construction management) to evaluate the project proposal and provide input with regard to CMP
plan policies, maintenance requirements, or other such details that can assist the project sponsors
in developing building and site plans that effectively incorporate and address applicable plan
policies and zoning requirements.
b.
The Review Process
The Campus Planning Committee (CPC) will review all proposals for new construction,
significant remodeling, and renovation projects that visually alter the exterior appearance of the
campus. The CPC shall be a body comprised of members from OSU, the City of Corvallis and
the Corvallis community. To this end, the CPC shall have, at a minimum, the representation
from academic and research faculty, academic affairs, faculty senate, Associated Students of
Oregon State University, Athletics, University Housing and Dining Services, Memorial Union,
Corvallis resident (i.e., community-at-large), City staff, City of Corvallis Historic Preservation
Advisory Board, Oregon University System, OSU Foundation, Alumni Relations, the Director
of Facilities Services, the Campus Planning Manager, and Deans and Provosts.
The CPC meetings shall be open to the public, but shall not be considered a public hearing where
testimony is provided by the public. OSU shall notice the meeting time and date by, at a
minimum, sending an email alert to interested Neighborhood Associations, posting electronic
notices on either the OSU webpage, through OSU Today electronic bulletins, or by some other
means that reaches faculty and staff. The notice will be released two weeks before the scheduled
date.
The project’s sponsor shall provide information including a statement of the project’s intent,
project scope, design, size, height, location, and materials. As appropriate, graphic materials of
additional project details shall be provided. Projects that involve a new building or significant
additions shall also include a conceptual plan of the surrounding area (typically the sector). The
conceptual plan shall demonstrate how the proposed building or addition is compatible with the
anticipated growth for the surrounding area or sector. In addition to the conceptual plan and other
required plans, the proposal shall include a discussion on the proposed use of the area and outline
any foreseeable expansion.
The CPC will review the proposal for site layout, building design, construction materials, and
compatibility with surrounding buildings and uses. The CPC will also consider how the proposed
construction is consistent with the Campus Master Plan, the City of Corvallis Comprehensive
Plan, zoning regulations, and related issues. It will then present and review the materials at a
meeting; those directly involved with the project are encouraged to attend.
5-2
Campus Master Plan
Design Guidelines
The CPC may approve, deny, or modify a proposal and will forward its recommendations to the
OSU Vice President for Finance and Administration. The CPC review is binding unless
overturned by the Vice President of Finance and Administration. The CPC shall make formal
findings regarding its decisions. These findings may be recorded in the minutes or included in a
separate document. When projects are denied or when the CPC has requested modifications, the
CPC shall explain its reasons for the decision. When project modifications are proposed, the
CPC shall relate how the modifications address the expressed concern. Formal findings adopted
by the CPC shall be incorporated into the design of the project unless the President or Vice
President for Finance and Administration makes an overriding decision.
The Vice President for Finance and Administration may accept or reconsider the CPC decision.
As appropriate, the Vice President for Finance and Administration can override a decision or
forward a request to the University Cabinet for further consideration. If forwarded to the
University Cabinet, the University Cabinet will review the proposal and the CPC
recommendation, and make a decision. This decision can be accepted or modified by the
President or Vice President for Finance and Administration.
c.
Architectural Selection and Design
Members of the Facilities Services staff, and representatives of the sponsoring OSU College or
department shall be involved in the selection of architectural consultants or other design
professionals retained to assist in new construction, significant remodeling, or renovation
activities.
The project is required to pay all costs associated with the project. This includes project
management, initial surveys, governmental reviews, permits, fees, legal description and
boundary establishment, geotechnical studies, engineering studies, architectural design, interior
design, landscape design, utility upgrade/extension, and other improvements required by the
development (parking, road improvements, etc). The project shall also pay for professional
services needed to complete the project. The project may also be required to contribute
financially to campus-wide transportation improvements, parking improvements, sewer, water,
drainage, or other campus development-related improvements.
d.
Project Scope
Each biennium, as part of the preparation of the university’s Capital Construction Budget
proposal, the various campus units submit project proposals to be considered for funding by the
state legislature. Prior to submittal to the state, these projects shall be reviewed by the CPC, in
consultation with other campus offices/departments and affected program units, for consistency
with the Campus Master Plan. Siting opportunities shall be identified for projects proposed for
funding in the biennia covered by the submittal and, as appropriate, for other biennia. The
selection of building sites is considered an implementation strategy of the CMP.
The CPC shall also review other projects that involve new construction or modification of
outdoor spaces or interior spaces with significant public exposure. In addition, the CPC shall
review significant remodeling or renovation projects that change the use of space within the
Campus Master Plan
5-3
Design Guidelines
building, change the manner in which the interior circulation functions, or change the outside
appearance of a building. Projects of a routine maintenance nature or those that do not involve
outdoor spaces or significant interior spaces do not need to undergo CPC review.
e.
Document Submittal Format
All building plans and site plan documents submitted for review shall be in hard copy as well as
a computerized format as determined by Facilities Services. Projects consistent with the CMP
shall be reviewed by the CPC for recommendation and/or approval. Applications for CPC review
can be obtained from Facilities Services. The application forms identify materials needed for
CPC review. Proposals requiring other jurisdictional reviews (e.g., city or county review for
zoning or building permits) will be required to prepare applications as per the jurisdiction’s
requirements.
5.2
Design Guidelines
a.
Code Compliance
All development shall be in compliance with the OSU zoning district, City of Corvallis Land
Development Code, and the Corvallis Comprehensive Plan. The development proposal shall also
comply with all other applicable adopted codes, including the Uniform Building Code, Fire
Code, and Mechanical and Electrical Specialty Code.
b.
Site Design
The campus is a collection improvements such as buildings, streets, sidewalks, open space,
parking areas, etc. that have been constructed for diverse purposes over a period of time. New
development must fit within the existing environment.
The most densely developed area of the campus is the core, identified as Sector C. The campus
core is pedestrian-oriented with closely grouped buildings that create a harmonious streetscape.
These buildings are organized in a series of symmetrical quadrangles. Landscape and site
furnishings serve as unifying elements. Bike and vehicular transportation routes are provided
along with pedestrian routes and connections to the remainder of campus.
Future development shall continue the pedestrian-oriented tradition and the location of buildings
in a harmonious streetscape. To the maximum extent possible, major instructional facilities shall
be located such that they can be reached within a 10-minute walk. Site design shall incorporate
internal circulation routes and connectivity.
5-4
Campus Master Plan
Design Guidelines
1.0
Site Development
Figure 5.2: Madison and 11th Street
2.0
Each project shall provide site improvements.
These include street improvements along the
site’s frontage, lighting, curbs, gutters, curb
cuts, sidewalks, landscaping, fencing, signage,
and utilities. The project shall also provide
off-site improvements as required by the
CMP, city regulations, or other approving
authority. Off-site improvements shall be
developed to reflect known or anticipated
future street widths, bicycle lanes, sidewalks,
or other planning efforts that have identified
future requirements. Handicap access shall be
provided so multiple points of ingress and
egress are available, in conformance with the
Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).
Site Access and Parking Entrances
Each building shall have a primary entrance oriented toward the street or public accessway. This
primary entrance must be accessed by a direct pedestrian connection (sidewalk, porch, courtyard,
etc.) from the street or accessway. If parking facilities are constructed with a new building, the
parking shall be located such that it does not create a barrier between the street and the primary
entryway. This will generally orient parking facilities to the side or behind the building. Where
existing development patterns limit or otherwise make this orientation unattainable, efforts
should be made to provide, to the maximum extent practicable, direct pedestrian access to the
street or accessway.
3.0
Streets
Campus development may require an upgrade to adjacent streets and/or intersections. Such
improvements shall be consistent with the CMP and may include construction of paved travel
lanes, on-street bicycle lanes, sidewalks, planting strips, curbs, gutters, and drainage
improvements. If an intersection needs to be upgraded to increase capacity or mitigate
unacceptable levels of service, the functional requirements of the street and the potential upgrade
shall be incorporated into the project. When pedestrian crosswalks are needed, they shall be
clearly defined through paint marking, raised crosswalk, or other changes in pavement style or
detail. Generally, crosswalks shall be at intersections. When mid-block crossings are used,
traffic-calming techniques should be employed to alert drivers of the crosswalk. Traffic-calming
techniques include speed tables, speed bumps, warning lights, and signage.
Campus Master Plan
5-5
Design Guidelines
c.
Open Space
Just as building design and character are important to the OSU image, so are the open spaces and
the visual relief these areas provide. Open space is defined as land area not covered by buildings
or used for vehicle maneuvering or parking. Campus open space includes lawn areas, agricultural
fields, recreation fields, sidewalks, quads, plazas, courtyards, and other such amenities that
provide the OSU community with a space and opportunity to co-mingle. Open space creates a
framework for development and offers areas for respite, exercise, and social interaction.
Open space is an important component in future development on campus. To ensure that open
space is retained throughout campus, the CMP establishes minimum open space requirements for
each development sector. As future development occurs, existing parking lots may be
redeveloped and used as building sites. This allows for new development without displacing
existing open space areas.
d.
Parking
Parking lot entrances shall be designed to provide adequate sight distances. Stacking area and
other design considerations should be incorporated to ensure that the entrance functions properly.
Other improvements required for access to and through the site may be required to ensure safe
and adequate site access.
Parking shall be managed on a campus-wide basis to ensure that overall utilization remains at 95
percent or less. Projects shall be responsible for providing the required amount of parking as
calculated by the Corvallis Land Development Code. The required parking spaces may be
constructed (pavement, landscaping, curb, gutter, drainage, etc.) on campus or the project can
pay an equivalent dollar value for the required number of spaces to Parking Services. Parking
Services will then ensure that parking improvements are provided such that the overall campus
utilization does not exceed the 95 percent threshold.
Individual projects that displace parking through development shall replace any displaced
parking. In Sector C, this shall be provided as near as possible to the location of the displaced
parking. Displaced parking shall be replaced at a one-to-one ratio, to the maximum extent
practicable. This may entail providing underground parking and/or parking within a portion of
the building.
Parking improvements may be in the form of parking structures or in lots. Parking lots should be
paved with asphalt or concrete and should be landscaped. New parking lots shall adhere to code
standards with pavement, landscaping, and other improvements. Over time, existing gravel lots
shall be upgraded. When a building is present, the parking lot shall be located on the side of or
behind the building. On corner lots, a parking lot on the side of the building could be located at a
street intersection. In these instances, the site design shall consider visual impacts to the
intersection, to street circulation (e.g., parking lot entrance distance from intersections, stacking
requirements), and to pedestrian circulation.
5-6
Campus Master Plan
Design Guidelines
For redeveloped sites, relocation of parking lots away from the front of the building is
encouraged. Sidewalks adjacent to parking lots should be designed so that the overhang of the
car bumper does not reduce the sidewalk to
a width that hinders adequate circulation.
Sites, buildings, and parking lots shall be
designed to provide universal access in
accordance with the Americans with
Disabilities Act (ADA) regulations. An
adequate number of parking spaces shall
meet ADA requirements and be
incorporated into campus parking lots.
Bicycle parking should be provided near all
buildings, with 50 percent of such parking
covered. The amount of bicycle parking for
new development shall be based on Land
Development Code requirements for the use.
Figure 5.3: Pedestrian Access to Core Campus
Whether covered or uncovered, bicycle parking areas shall be designed as an amenity to the
building. They shall not block building entrances or impede pedestrian circulation.
Service areas, loading, and unloading zones within parking lots shall be adequately screened
from adjacent uses and buildings and shall be located so the circulation in the parking area is not
impeded during scheduled deliveries.
e.
Pedestrian Access and Circulation
Development should be pedestrian-oriented rather than vehicle-oriented. Buildings should have
multiple points of access with provisions made for pedestrian and bicycle traffic (i.e., sidewalks,
on-street bicycle lanes, multi-use paths, etc.). Pedestrian safety should be considered in the
design of all buildings, traffic, and parking areas.
Pedestrian connections and sidewalks should be unobstructed to provide convenient linkages to
specific destinations and across campus. The parking of service and vendor vehicles should be
prohibited on sidewalks or in bike lanes.
Alternatives will need to be explored for the campus core area where delivery and service
vehicles have historically used the sidewalk and/or bike lanes for parking.
f.
Landscape
All new construction shall incorporate landscaping as part of the site plan. Landscaping shall be
provided consistent with the established campus landscaping standards as included in the
Facilities Services Landscape Design Standards and any updates.
Campus Master Plan
5-7
Design Guidelines
Plant materials used on campus shall be a mix of deciduous trees, evergreens, shrubs,
groundcovers, etc. Efforts shall be made to use native plant species adapted to local conditions.
Where possible, plant materials that are drought resistant or require little water should be
incorporated into landscape areas.
All new landscape areas shall be irrigated. Ease of long-term maintenance should be included in
the landscape design. Lawn configurations and tree and shrub locations should allow for the use
of riding mowers. Plant materials that are damaged or die shall be replaced.
Landscaping shall be placed around buildings to soften the bulk and mass, establish a human
scale to the space, and as appropriate establish a focal point. Plantings shall not be placed so
close to the building that, at maturity, they prevent adequate building maintenance. Additionally,
plant materials shall be maintained so as not to visually obscure building entrances or interfere
with sight lines from a building to the adjacent street. Plantings shall not create hazardous
conditions to personal safety.
Landscaping shall be located along the perimeter and the interior of parking lots to provide
visual relief and shade. Each parking lot shall meet the minimum landscape area requirement
with the plant material being a mix of trees and shrubs, as per the Land Development Code
requirements. A minimum 5-foot-wide landscape strip should serve as a buffer or transition
between the parking lot and the adjacent site or use. Street trees shall be planted to create and
maintain a uniform street concept.
g.
Utilities and Site Furnishings
All signage, site furnishings (i.e., lights, benches, bicycle racks, etc.) shall comply with OSU
standards and be consistent with CMP and other established regulations. Lighting shall be
installed to provide safe conditions for access and circulation. Light illuminating from the
fixtures shall be cast downward. When the “historic” type fixtures are used, internal louvers or
other appliances to direct the light cone downward shall be used. OSU will also explore
replacing existing fixtures with more energy efficient fixtures.
Storm drainage shall be within a piped system or open-area system such as a bio-swale. As
needed, on-site detention to maintain historical peak flows may be incorporated into the project
design. A separate storm drainage system shall be provided to convey stormwater flows. All
other city public utilities shall be developed in accordance with existing utility master plans and
be reviewed through the Public Improvement by Private Contract (PIPC) process. All other
utilities shall be developed consistent with established standards.
The CMP’s goal is to ensure that utilities are sized and placed in a manner that will serve the
campus today and tomorrow. Any upgrades to utilities required as a result of development
should be included in the cost of the project.
5-8
Campus Master Plan
Design Guidelines
h.
Building Design
The campus generally reflects the Collegiate Classical Revival Style. Common design elements,
materials, and colors can provide a unified appearance and create a harmonious link to the
existing physical environment.
Below is a list of various design characteristics that may be incorporated in new construction.
(Not every design characteristic need be included in each new construction.)
•
Greek, Gothic, Romanesque, Chateauesque, and Victorian
•
Eclectic adaptation of classical forms and details into modern building masses, human
scale
•
Supports multiple functions and uses based on current and projected needs of user groups
•
Multi-story building
•
Masonry (red brick)
•
Gable (pediment) roof forms
•
Sloping roofs
•
Three-part building (base, middle, capital)
•
Defined roof edges and building base
•
Columns or pilasters (columns visibly built into the wall)
•
Visibly bearing walls
•
Well-developed major and minor entrances
•
Simple building masses
•
Symmetrical design
•
Linked to pedestrian open spaces such as plaza, quads, courtyards, and sidewalks.
Examples of the desired building design include Bates Hall, Owens Hall, CH2M Hill Alumni
Center, and the Agricultural and Life Sciences building. Each shows adaptation of classical
forms and details. Each harmonizes with surrounding buildings while meeting the needs of
current structural systems and research laboratory layouts.
Campus Master Plan
5-9
Design Guidelines
1.0
Style
The finest buildings on campus are
characterized by their simple, symmetrical
massing, articulated center-bay entries, punched
windows, and three-part vertical massing with a
base, middle, and top. Red brick is the
predominant building material. Stone and terra
cotta are used sparingly, primarily to highlight
building entrances, windows, corners, lintels,
bases, cornices, and copings. Some buildings
incorporate columns and pilasters on the facade
to emphasize a vertical bay organization and
create a sense of monumentality.
Generally, new buildings shall be consistent
with the established masonry theme. However,
Figure 5.4: Valley Library Rotunda
there may be instances when other building
styles are appropriate such as for storage or agricultural buildings. These buildings may consider
the use of different building materials and styles, provided that the materials are consistent with
overall development within the vicinity, are not in the core campus, and are not readily visible
from the entrance street corridors.
2.0
Proportion
A key ingredient in the composition of existing historic building facades is the proportional
relationship between the parts of the structure. If elements of the facade such as windows, wall
areas, bays, and entrances are diagrammed to show the proportional relationship of height to
width, the composition of architectural parts becomes apparent. If drawn in a diagram, a diagonal
line indicates the relationship of height to width and equally angled diagonals indicate equal
proportions. Often in the composition of an historic facade, a few proportionally consistent parts
are repeated and combined to form the whole, which itself reflects the same proportional
relationship. In multi-story buildings, a belt coursing at the floor line has helped downscale the
buildings.
3.0
Modulation
Large exterior masonry wall areas shall be visibly broken down into more human-scaled sections
with jigs and jogs, offsets, shadow lines, and belt courses. Modulation is required horizontally as
well as vertically. Modulation by providing recesses and/or extensions (entrances, floor area,
etc.), with offsets as little as 12 inches are acceptable if the overall impact creates a visually
effective modulation of the facade that is acceptable to the CPC.
5-10
Campus Master Plan
Design Guidelines
4.0
Vertical Bays
Columns, pilasters, or other relief elements shall be used to establish a vertical bay expression.
The wall may be layered to express structure, wall, and window relief, and scale.
5.0
Corners
Pilasters, quoins, building walls, rustication, or an articulated end-bay expression shall visually
reinforce the corners of the building.
6.0
Base
Buildings shall sit on a clearly articulated substantial base. The base shall begin at approximately
the level of the first-floor windows if the first floor is approximately level with grade. The base
should begin at approximately the level of the first floor framing if the first floor is
approximately three or four feet above grade, as might occur with a basement. The base line is
proportionally higher in tall buildings.
7.0
Cornice
A cornice or coping shall clearly terminate at the uppermost edge of the building facade. The
horizontal roofline shall be expressed in some fashion without allowing the eave to be visible. A
well developed parapet line with shadow lines and/or material changes shall be provided in new
buildings.
8.0
Windows
Windows shall be vertical in proportion, reminiscent of the double hung scaling, and set back
into the facade. Groupings of windows shall be articulated to maintain a verticality of the
opening. Verticality can be relaxed when windows are in the building base or an implied attic.
Detailing of window openings shall include visually distinguishable masonry or stone sill and
lintel. The exterior fenestration shall represent approximately 20 percent of the exterior wall
area. Current energy codes require less window area, but efforts shall be made to visually break
up the facade to suggest some visual texture and penetration suggested by windows. Glazing
shall not have reflective qualities, which prevent visual transparency from the outside. OSU must
approve glazing colors. Window framing members should not be highly colored.
Operable windows, if allowed by the building’s HVAC system, shall have screens. Exterior
mounted or applied solar screening (such as that removed from the south side of the Valley
library) is not acceptable.
Campus Master Plan
5-11
Design Guidelines
9.0
Entries
The building shall have a primary entry oriented to a street or pedestrian accessway. The
building entry shall generally be in the center bay of the center facade. The entry shall be
highlighted by the use of masonry, stone, terra cotta or other treatment that makes it readily
recognizable. Traditional, inviting entry elements such as the arch, architrave, carved lintel, or
porch are encouraged. Pedestrian amenities, such as plazas, courtyards, porches, entry quad, etc.,
shall be incorporated into the main building design.
The building name shall appear on signage placed at the front entrance. Signage shall be of the
approved OSU style and standard. The site design should reinforce the central entry and
highlight the sense of arrival. Protruding and/or recessed entries should articulate the primary
entry.
Pedestrian use of service entries should be discouraged. Service entries on larger buildings shall
be recessed or screened to conceal delivery docks and trash enclosures. For larger buildings, a
loading dock shall be provided.
10.0
Building Materials
The building shall be predominately red brick, with stone and terra cotta used for accented
features. Accented features commonly include building entries, window surrounds, bases,
cornices, and special volumetric elements such as porches, atriums or courtyards. Generally,
stone and terra cotta are most elaborate at the building entry. Exterior finishes shall be durable
and consistent with newer adjacent buildings.
Samples of all proposed building materials shall be reviewed by the assigned Facilities Services
construction project manager. Wood siding and synthetic stucco finishes are prohibited.
11.0
Roofs
The majority of the visible roof area shall be sloping at a ratio that equals or exceeds a 4-inch
rise over a 12-inch run (4-to-12 ratio). Any low-slope roof areas shall have a 4-ply built up Class
A roof system, EPDM, or other single-ply system. Visible roof areas shall be covered with tile,
concrete shingles, or a standing rib anodized colored metal roofing system. Three-tab asphalt
shingles are prohibited.
Roof mounted equipment shall be screened behind a parapet wall, fence, or other architectural
feature so that it is not visible from the street. No exposed galvanized metal, including flashing,
shall be used on any portion of the building. All paints on metal shall be applied during
manufacture (at least the primer coat). Roof colors shall be in a color range compatible with the
style of the building and surrounding buildings. The roof should have an integral gutter with rain
leaders internal to the structure.
The use of an eco-roof (vegetated roof) is encouraged as a benchmark trial. OSU has no
experience with this type of roofing system, but would like to see it explored as a roofing option.
5-12
Campus Master Plan
Design Guidelines
If an eco-roof is approved, OSU should carefully evaluate the design, its construction, and its
maintenance to determine the roof’s efficacy and use in the future.
12.0
Building Systems
Air conditioning shall be provided in new buildings. Where possible, passive ventilation,
lighting, or other similar systems shall be incorporated into the building. Building mechanical
systems and HVAC units should not be visible from the exterior of the building. Architectural
plans and elevations should identify all site- and building-mounted mechanical equipment
locations. Freestanding utility storage units or transformers shall generally be avoided. When this
is not possible, they shall be screened from view through the use of architectural design, walls,
fencing, landscaping, or other treatments.
13.0
Accessibility
All new buildings shall be completely and conveniently accessible to disabled individuals. This
includes the main entrances, offices, classrooms, laboratories, restrooms, and general circulation
areas. Remodels and renovations shall incorporate accessibility improvements, to the maximum
extent practicable.
Access to and within the building shall comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)
standards and regulations. The building shall comply with ADA regulations and allow for
universal access. Doors that must meet ADA requirements shall be automated.
14.0
OSU Design Criteria
OSU Design Criteria, available at the Facilities Services Department, requires specific
architectural, mechanical, and electrical materials and methods. Copies will be provided to
architecture and engineering team members selected to assist with construction projects.
15.0
Sustainability
All new and significant remodeling and renovation projects should be designed and constructed
to incorporate sustainability considerations. To the maximum extent practicable, this will include
applicable energy efficiency and environmental design standards and evolving guidelines and/or
certification criteria linked to sustainability initiatives.
16.0
Fire Rating
Buildings must be of a construction type permitted by the Fire Code, and a minimum of Type
V-1 hour equivalent. Buildings should have 1-hour rated exitways and typically allow B
occupancy classification and A-3 when required by the project.
Campus Master Plan
5-13
Design Guidelines
i.
General Standards
1.0
Floor Area Ratio (FAR)
The amount of building square footage to land square footage is known as the floor area ratio
(FAR). A FAR of at least 2.0 should be encouraged, but preferably ratios above 3.5 should be
attained in sector C to maximize available buildable land and to preserve open space.
2.0
Site Building Coverage
All new construction shall be in accordance with minimum open space requirements and
maximum impervious surface cover provisions identified for the development sector in which
the building is located.
3.0
Setback and Building Heights
Setbacks and building heights shall be consistent with the CMP and the provisions identified for
the development sector in which the building is located.
4.0
Transition Areas
Buildings and structures within transition areas shall be designed to be consistent with the OSU
Design Criteria and the guidelines set forth in this chapter, while at the same time compatible
with the existing buildings and structures within the neighborhoods adjacent to the proposed
building site.
All trash enclosures, outdoor storage areas, and mechanical equipment shall be screened in
accordance with the OSU District regulations. OSU will prevent buildings and structures from
falling into disrepair across campus, and specifically maintain buildings and structures in good
condition in areas adjacent to and visible from neighborhoods adjacent to OSU and within the
transitions areas.
5-14
Campus Master Plan
CAMPUS MASTER PLAN
2004-2015
Chapter 6 – Transportation Plan
Transportation Plan
6.0 Transportation Plan
The university’s transportation system must provide all members of the campus community with
safe and convenient access to OSU. It must also provide a seamless connection to the local,
regional, and statewide transportation system. This necessitates diverse multi-modal
transportation improvements, including sidewalks, multi-use paths, bike lanes, roads, transit, and
shuttles. Because transportation improvements can negatively impact the campus environment
and surrounding land uses, careful and coordinated planning efforts are required. To this end,
OSU will make improvements to limit transportation impacts through the campus and to
surrounding residential neighborhoods. At the same time, improvements need to provide a
convenient, multi-modal, campus-wide transportation network.
OSU will participate in a neighborhood task force in accordance with Appendix C of the CMP.
The study area for the task force will be an area encompassing the western boundary of the
Cedarhurst Neighborhood Association to the eastern boundary of the North College Hill
Neighborhood Association between Harrison Boulevard to the north and Oregon State
University District boundary to the south. This includes the College Hill Neighborhood
Association. OSU will also participate in other City-approved neighborhood task forces in other
defined geographical areas/neighborhoods as necessary.
6.1
Transportation Policies
6.1.1
Plan and construct OSU transportation system improvements consistent with the City of
Corvallis Comprehensive Plan, Land Development Code, Transportation Plan, and
Standard, Construction Specifications.
6.1.2
OSU shall continue to implement Transportation Demand Management(TDM) measures
such as the pre-paid mass transit program and explore opportunities to further reduce
reliance on single occupancy vehicles. OSU shall report TDM activities taken and
measure of effectiveness with annual parking.
6.1.3
Consider TDM principles, such as continued participation in the pre-paid mass-transit
pass program and other measures, whenever possible to avoid or delay construction of
new transportation facilities and to reduce reliance on automobiles.
6.1.4
Consider improvements to sidewalks, multi-use paths, on-street bicycle lanes, street
alignments, intersections, turn lanes, and road striping as part of the physical
development of campus, constructing the improvements as needed or as conditions
warrant.
6.1.5
Ensure that the cost of required transportation improvements associated with a project are
included in the project construction budget.
Campus Master Plan
6-1
Transportation Plan
6.1.6
Develop an internal funding mechanism that requires that new construction and
significant remodeling projects are assessed for needed campus infrastructure and other
improvements. An assessment adjustment shall be made for projects that include
infrastructure improvements.
6.1.7
Implement improvements along 35th Street in accordance with the OSU-City 35th Street
Improvement Agreement.
6.1.8
Design the transportation system to emphasize and encourage walking as the primary
form of transportation in the campus core area.
6.1.9
Encourage alternative modes of transportation (e.g., walking, bicycling, car/vanpooling,
transit).
6.1.10 Organize the campus core such that academic uses are within a 10-minute walk to
facilitate student travel between classes.
6.1.11 Consider pedestrian amenities (lighting, sidewalks, bench placement, planters,
courtyards, quads, transit stops/shelters, bike racks, recycling receptacles, etc.) as part of
typical street improvements.
6.1.12 Continue to maintain the transportation system of streets, roads, paths, sidewalks, and
bicycle lanes for safety and good operating conditions.
6.1.13 Consider all potential funding sources for transportation improvements and maintenance
projects.
6.1.14 Continue to review potential funding mechanisms to improve the efficiency and
frequency of shuttle service across the campus.
6.1.15 Continue to support the campus shuttle service.
6.1.16 Locate material receiving and distribution facilities in areas that do not create circulation
conflicts and/or are least disruptive to surrounding uses.
6.1.17 Continue to take actions to improve campus accessibility from highways and major
streets, and by public transportation. Coordinate campus transportation planning and
improvements with local government transportation plans and area transit providers that
service OSU. Where possible, locate new facilities to take advantage of public transit
systems.
6.1.18 OSU shall participate in a neighborhood task force in accordance with Appendix C of the
CMP. If other task forces are formed and approved by the City to review traffic
conditions within other geographical areas adjacent to the OSU District Boundary, then
OSU shall participate in those task forces as well.
6-2
Campus Master Plan
Transportation Plan
6.1.19 OSU shall update its Base Transportation Model in accordance with LDC 3.36.70.
6.1.20 OSU shall update the Traffic Impact Analysis for Sector J in accordance with Sector J
Policies 4.2.6.j, 4.2.7.j, and 4.2.8.j.
6.2
Transportation System
The base transportation system on the OSU campus is the existing roads, bike lanes, sidewalks,
and multi-use paths. This base system allows people, goods, and services to move safely and
efficiently through the campus. The system also aligns with surrounding improvements in the
City of Corvallis, Benton County, and State of Oregon. As such, improvements within OSU must
be coordinated with adjacent jurisdictions. For planning purposes, OSU is relying on the city’s
adopted functional classification system to direct the type of improvements needed for systemwide operations. See figures 6.1 and 6.2.
Campus Master Plan
6-3
Transportation Plan
Figure 6.1: Functional Classification Systems
6-4
Campus Master Plan
Transportation Plan
Road improvements generally minimize vehicular community traffic through the OSU campus.
Thus, major east-west travel routes are to the north and south of campus. Monroe Avenue and
Harrison Blvd./Van Buren Blvd. are on the northern edge of campus; Western Blvd. and
Highway 20/34 are on the south. Despite an effort to minimize east-west through-traffic, a
number of east-west vehicular corridors still exist. These are Campus Way, Jefferson Way, and
Washington Way.
The following are the major east-west and north-south circulation routes through campus:
Campus Way. Provides for east-west travel from 14th Street to 35th Street. Portions of the
roadway have restricted vehicular travel regulations (service vehicles only) and vehicular travel
is limited to one direction.
Jefferson Way. Provides for east-west travel from downtown Corvallis to 35th Street. Portions of
the roadway have restricted vehicular travel regulations (service vehicles only) and vehicular
travel is limited to one direction.
Washington Way. Provides for two-way east-west travel from 15th Street to 35th Street.
14th/15th Street. Provides for north-south travel from Harrison/Van Buren Blvd. to Highway
20/34. South of Hwy 20/34, 15th Street serves as a bypass to South Corvallis.
26th Street. Provides for north-south access from Monroe Street through campus to the area
known as South Farm. Portions of the roadway have restricted travel regulations (service
vehicles only) and vehicular travel is limited to one direction. South of Highway 20/34, the road
becomes Brooklane Drive, providing access to South Farm (Sector J).
30th Street. Provides for north-south travel from Harrison Blvd. to Highway 20/34. 30th Street
hosts “The Mall,” a wide landscaped center median. The mall extends from Orchard Avenue to
Washington Way.
35th Street. Provides for north-south travel from Harrison Blvd. to Highway 20/34 and beyond to
the south. 35th Street has varying levels of improvements through the OSU campus. The cityOSU 35th Street Agreement ties various segments of improvements to development on the OSU
campus.
Figure 6.2 shows the OSU-owned and publicly owned streets on campus.
Campus Master Plan
6-5
Transportation Plan
Figure 6.2: OSU Street Ownership (Private Streets)
6-6
Campus Master Plan
Transportation Plan
6.3
Transportation Impacts
Future campus development has the potential to create additional traffic and in turn impact the
level of road improvements. By 2015, OSU’s student enrollment is projected to increase to
22,500, with faculty/staff projected to increase to 5,100. Building area is also projected to
increase by 2.4 to 3.1 million gross square feet, resulting in 1.6 to 2 million assignable square
feet (ASF). (For a full discussion of growth, see Chapter 3 – Projected Facility Needs).
Innovative Transportation Concepts, Inc. (ITC), a traffic engineering consulting firm, conducted
a comprehensive transportation study in January 2003 to determine OSU’s trip generation rates,
identify travel patterns and behaviors, and model future transportation impacts. The analysis took
the form of a Base Transportation Model (BTM) that consisted of four components:
•
•
•
•
Travel survey;
Model application;
Transportation Demand Management (TDM) measures, and
Mitigation measures.
A full report is in the Technical Appendix of this CMP.
6.4
Travel Survey
ITC conducted a detailed travel survey to gather data on campus travel patterns and behaviors.
The travel survey had three objectives:
1. Analyze trip generation, mode shares, and the length of trips to and from OSU;
2. Develop weighting factors to adjust the sample data from the surveyed buildings to be
representative of similar buildings on campus; and
3. Determine trip generation rates based on predictable independent variables.
The travel survey allowed for the determination of the following:
Trip generation rates. The calculation of the number of trips that result from campus uses. Trip
generation rates can be used to assess future traffic impacts and are used in the BTM. Potentially,
these rates can also be used by the city to calculate transportation System Development Charges
(SDC) for new OSU development.
Mode choice. The quantification of each travel mode for travel to and from campus and for
intra-campus travel.
Peak hours. The time period in which travel volumes on campus are at the highest. Peak hours
are evaluated for all travel modes and are used in the BTM.
Campus Master Plan
6-7
Transportation Plan
Trip purposes. The identification of the reason for a particular trip. This information is used in
building the BTM because trip purpose affects mode choice, time of travel, and trip length.
The travel survey was based on cordon counts and traveler interviews.
a.
Cordon Counts
Cordon counts determined the total number of people entering and leaving 16 surveyed
buildings. These buildings were chosen to represent student, faculty, and staff needs and include
seven general campus use categories:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Administration (Kerr, Snell-MU East);
Instruction (Owen, Milam, Weigand, Bexell, Weniger);
Recreation (Dixon);
Housing (Cauthorn, Finley, Dixon Housing);
Research (Nash, Richardson);
Computer Services/Library (Valley Library, Milne Computing Center); and
Student Services (Memorial Union).
The counts took place January 20 through January 24, 2003. This period represents the highest
potential enrollment; it is a week before students can begin to drop classes without penalty, and
includes a full class schedule (i.e., Monday-Wednesday-Friday classes and Tuesday-Thursday
classes).
A total of 23,500 people were counted at 15-minute intervals for two periods. The AM period
was from 7:45 to 10:45. The PM period was from 4:00 to 6:00. In addition, 8-hour counts were
conducted from 7:45 AM to 6:00 PM at Weniger and Finley.
b.
Traveler Interviews
Traveler interviews took place January 28 through January 30, 2003. A total of 1,437 people
were interviewed. The same buildings used for the cordon counts were used for the interviews.
Each interview was completed in one to three minutes and limited to one page in length. The
interviewers were OSU staff (including student interns) and volunteers. All the interviewers
received specialized training prior to the interview process. Each interviewer was assigned a
building entrance or exit. At locations of high traffic volume, multiple interviewers were
assigned.
c.
Data Processing
ITC developed generic trip purpose variables for OSU to reflect campus travel behaviors. These
variables included:
•
•
•
6-8
Home off campus Based Work (HBW);
Home off campus Based School (HBSch);
Home Based Other (HBO);
Campus Master Plan
Transportation Plan
•
•
•
•
•
Home on campus Based Work (HcBW);
Home on campus Based School (HcBSch);
Home on campus Based Other (HcBO);
Non Home Based (NHB); and
Campus Based Campus (CBC).
Because not all travelers were interviewed, some of the subgroups (e.g., HBW, HBO, HBSch)
were over- or under-represented. To ensure proper representation, a weighting system was
developed to improve the accuracy of trip generation rate calculations for the campus as a whole.
d.
Weighting System
This weighting system is based on:
•
•
•
Count/Interview Weight (CIW);
Building/Purpose Weight (BPW); and
Building/Purpose Weight, with time factor (BPW2).
For additional details, please consult the Technical Appendix of this CMP.
e.
Peak Travel Periods
Trips were quantified as trips per peak period. Peak hours were determined using the weighted
survey sample. Trip arrival or departure times from the interview were grouped into 15-minute
intervals to be consistent with the count data. The trip survey was split into intra-campus trips
and from/to campus trips. To determine the peak hour, only the from/to-campus trips were
evaluated, since intra-campus trips are done mainly on foot and almost never involve vehicles.
Based on the data gathered from the travel survey, the AM and PM peaks for all modes, except
intra-campus travel, are 8:00 AM to 9:00 AM and 4:30 PM to 5:30 PM. The AM and PM peaks
for vehicular trips (all trips except intra-campus) are 8:00 AM to 9:00 AM and 4:15 PM to 5:15
PM or 4:30 PM to 5:30 PM. Peak hour trips are measured by arrival or departure from the
buildings. The actual traffic peak on the streets and intersections on and around campus can
potentially occur up to 15 minutes earlier or later.
f.
Modes of Travel
There are several modes of travel, each contributing to the overall traffic on campus. The modes
can be categorized as pedestrian (walkers), bicycle, transit, and private automobile. The BTM
identified the modal split for these categories over the survey period. The modal split was
grouped into from/to travel and intra-campus travel.
As Table 6.1 indicates, the largest mode share is car drive alone, followed by walking and
bicycling. The lowest mode shares are carpool, bus, and OSU shuttle.
Campus Master Plan
6-9
Transportation Plan
Table 6.1: Mode Shares for Travel From/To Campus
Mode
Car Drive Alone
Walk
Bicycle
Carpool
Bus
OSU Shuttle
Total
Number of Trips
AM
PM
Total
7,064
4,534 11,598
2,491
2,718
5,209
1,071
1,057
2,128
414
567
981
380
174
554
240
88
328
11,660
9,138 20,798
Percentage
AM
PM
61%
50%
21%
30%
9%
12%
4%
6%
3%
2%
2%
1%
100%
100%
Total
56%
25%
10%
5%
3%
2%
100%
Table 6.2 indicates that the largest mode share for intra-campus travel is walking, followed by
car drive alone and bicycle.
Table 6.2: Mode Shares for Intra-Campus Travel
Mode
Walk
Car Drive Alone
Bicycle
Carpool
OSU Shuttle
Bus
Total
Number of Trips
AM
PM
Total
11,908 11,819 23,727
1,637
1,001
2,638
980
761
1,741
173
37
210
54
15
69
71
0
71
14,823 13,633 28,456
Percentage
AM
PM
80%
87%
11%
7%
7%
6%
1%
0%
0.40%
0.10%
0%
0%
100%
100%
Total
83%
9%
6%
1%
0.20%
0%
100%
The from/to campus trips are split between home and the campus (HBO, HBSch, and HBW),
while intra-campus trips are mostly non-home based (NHB). This implies that campus trips are
between class buildings. The peak hour intra-campus travel of 10:15 AM to 10:45 AM also
coincides with the time when a majority of classes begin and end.
Mode share surveys were completed in 1984 and 1997. However, these past surveys cannot be
used to compare to present data because they were less detailed and used a different collection
methodology.
Table 6.3: Historical Mode Share Information
Mode
Auto
Walk
Bicycle
Transit
Other
6-10
1984
34%
46%
17%
1%
2%
1987
41%
37%
21%
1%
--
Campus Master Plan
Transportation Plan
OSU will periodically complete a mode share survey using the methodology developed by ITC.
This will ensure consistency in data collection. Future mode share surveys will assist in
identifying changing travel trends at OSU.
g.
Trip Generation Rates
The travel survey determined trip generation rates using two sets of variables. The first set of
variables included the following:
Number of students. Head count of all students enrolled at OSU. The total in February 2002
was 18,834. Paid graduate students are not included in the student head count. This variable is
not available for individual buildings.
Enrollment. Count of the student enrollment in all classes or other education activities. This
differs from the head count because some students are counted more than once. On average,
every student is counted eight times. The total enrollment for winter 2002/2003 is 160,300. This
statistic includes both undergraduate and graduate students.
Gross square feet. The total area of all OSU buildings.
Rented beds. All rented beds from student housing on campus. The total is 3,714 for the entire
campus in 2003-2004
Employment. All employees working in OSU buildings, including paid graduate students. The
total is 6,000 for the entire campus.
The second set of variables is defined by uses that have assignable square footage. Assignable
square footage is the amount of the gross square footage that is actually assigned for use.
Campus Master Plan
6-11
Transportation Plan
Table 6.4: Uses with Assignable Square Footage
Use
Instructional
Abbreviation Description
INS
All instructional floor space including all classrooms,
lecture theaters, and teaching laboratories.
Library
Research
Administration
Frequent Services
Occasional Services
Recreation
Events
Food Services
Physical Plant
Housing
LIB
RES
ADM
F_SVC
O_SVC
RECR
EVENT
FOOD
PHPLT
HOUSE
Library floor space including stacks and archives.
Research floor space including laboratories
Administrative floor space including offices
Frequently used services like the OSU bookstore
Occasionally used services
Mainly Dixon Recreational Center
Event floor space like Reser Stadium
Food services for student housing and restaurants
Physical plant floor space including power generators
Student housing
When compared to the Institute of Transportation Engineers Manual (ITE), which is the
industry-standard reference for trip generation rates, the results show that for vehicle trips during
the peak hour, the rates from the survey are higher than the ITE average rates during the AM
peak. However, during the PM peak, the rates from the survey are lower compared to the ITE
average rate. This result is consistent with the count data regarding the higher AM peak
compared to the PM peak.
Table 6.5: Growth and Assignable Square Footage by Scenario
Existing
Most Likely
Scenario
Footage
Assignable
7,675,513
2,465,000
3,155,000
10,140,513
10,830,513
Square Footage
4,733,787
1,577,600
2,019,200
6,311,387
6,752,987
Future Growth
Gross Square
6.5
FullBuld-Out
Total Most
Total Full BuildScenario
Likely Scenario Out Scenario
Base Transportation Model
The BTM uses the VISUM platform and consists of a classic 3-stage model of trip generation,
trip distribution, and trip assignment. The model discriminates between OSU trips and non-OSU
trips (i.e., Corvallis and external trips). The non-OSU trips were obtained from the existing
Corvallis travel demand model for the 62,500-population scenario.
To coordinate transportation planning, each of the development sectors was further divided into
61 sub-units or Transportation Analysis Zones (TAZ). (See Figure 6.3) Generally, each TAZ has
at least one building and/or parking lot that is the origin or destination for vehicle trips. A few of
the TAZs do not have existing development but are anticipated to have future development that
6-12
Campus Master Plan
Transportation Plan
will be an origin or destination of vehicle trip generations. By dividing the campus into these
sub-units, more detailed analyses could occur at either the building or sector level.
This information was then integrated into the Base Transportation Model (BTM) to analyze the
future transportation system needs of the campus.
More detailed information is in the Technical Appendix.
a.
Existing Level of Service
Level of Service (LOS) is a description of an intersection in terms of safety, travel speed,
frequency of interruptions in traffic flow, ease of turning maneuvers, convenience, and operating
cost. The six levels of service range from A to F, with A being the best rating and F the worst.
Table 6.6: Existing Level of Service
Study Intersection
North-South
East-West
Control Type
9th Street
Jefferson Ave.
2-Way Stop
9th Street
Monroe Ave.
Signalized
11th Street
Jefferson Ave.
2-Way Stop
14th Street
Monroe Ave.
Signalized
15th Street
Western Blvd.
Signalized
15th Street
Washington Way 2-Way Stop
15th Street
Washington Ave. 2-Way Stop
15th Street
Jefferson Ave.
Signalized
17th Street
Western Blvd.
2-Way Stop
17th Street
Washington Way 2-Way Stop
King’s Blvd
Monroe Ave.
3-Way Stop
Park Terrace
(25th Street)
Monroe Ave.
2-Way Stop
Campus Master Plan
Peak Hour
Existing LOS
Intersection Approach
AM
PM
AM
PM
AM
PM
AM
PM
AM
PM
AM
PM
AM
PM
AM
PM
AM
PM
AM
PM
AM
PM
AM
A
A
C
C
A
A
C
C
D
D
A
A
A
A
C
C
A
A
A
A
A
B
A
B
C
B
C
B
C
B
D
B
B
A
A
A
C
C
PM
A
D
6-13
Transportation Plan
Study Intersection
26th Street
th
Highway 34
Control Type
Peak Hour
2-Way
Stop/Signalize
AM
26 Street
Western Blvd.
2-Way Stop
26th Street
Washington
4-Way Stop
26th Street
Monroe Ave.
2-Way Stop
29th Street
Harrison Ave.
Signalized
30th Street
Western Blvd.
2-Way Stop
30th Street
Washington
4-Way Stop
30th Street
Orchard Ave.
2-Way Stop
30th Street
Harrison Ave.
2-Way Stop
35th Street
Highway 34
Signalized
35th Street
Western Blvd.
4-Way Stop
35th Street
Jefferson Ave.
2-Way Stop
35th Street
Campus Way
2-Way Stop
35th Street
Harrison Ave.
2-Way Stop
36th Street
Harrison Ave.
2-Way Stop
6-14
Existing LOS
Intersectio Approach
n
A
F
PM
AM
PM
AM
PM
AM
PM
AM
PM
AM
PM
AM
PM
AM
PM
AM
PM
AM
PM
AM
PM
AM
PM
B
A
A
A
A
A
A
C
C
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
D
C
F
F
A
A
F
C
C
A
A
B
C
B
C
A
A
C
C
D
F
F
F
C
C
AM
PM
AM
PM
AM
PM
A
A
A
C
B
A
C
B
E
F
D
D
Campus Master Plan
Transportation Plan
Figure 6.3: Transportation Analysis Zones
Campus Master Plan
6-15
Transportation Plan
b.
Trip Generation
The trip generation component of the BTM was modeled for the most likely and future build-out
development scenarios. Results of this trip generation are reflected in the AM and PM peak
hours per 1,000 square feet of assignable square footage (ASF).
ASF is used as the explanatory variable first because it has the most direct relationship between
future development, building occupancy, and actual building activity. Second, data is maintained
and updated based on ASF and use for all campus buildings. Lastly, there is a stronger
correlation between ASF and trip generation compared to any of the other variables.
c.
Trip Distribution
OSU trip distribution was estimated based on the responses to the travel survey. The BTM
analyzed trip generation for both AM and PM peak hours. The existing trips for each were used
as a baseline to compare the scenarios against projected growth for peak hours.
6.6
Development Scenario Impact on Level of Service
Each development scenario—most likely and full build-out—was modeled against existing
conditions to determine the impact of the anticipated growth on the existing level of service at
nearby intersections.
Table 6.7: Level of Service by Development Scenario
Study Intersection
Control Type
North-South
9th Street
East-West
Jefferson Ave.
2-Way Stop
9th Street
Monroe Ave.
Signalized
11th Street
Jefferson Ave.
2-Way Stop
14th Street
Monroe Ave.
Signalized
15th Street
Western Blvd.
Signalized
15th Street
Washington Way 2-Way Stop
6-16
Peak Hour
AM
PM
AM
PM
AM
PM
AM
PM
AM
PM
AM
PM
Level of Service
Full
Most BuildExisting Likely
Out
I* A* I
A I A
A
A
C
C
A
A
C
C
D
D
A
A
B
C
B
C
B
C
A
B
C
C
A
A
C
C
D
D
A
A
B
D
C
C
C
D
A
C
C
C
B
B
C
D
D
D
A
C
B
F
D
D
C
F
Campus Master Plan
Transportation Plan
Study Intersection
Control Type
North-South
15th Street
East-West
Washington Ave. 2-Way Stop
15th Street
Jefferson Ave.
Signalized
17th Street
Western Blvd.
2-Way Stop
17th Street
Washington Way 2-Way Stop
King’s Blvd
Monroe Ave.
3-Way Stop
Park Terrace
(25th Street)
Monroe Ave.
2-Way Stop
th
26 Street
th
Highway 34
2-Way Stop /
Signalized
26 Street
Western Blvd.
26th Street
Washington Way 4-Way Stop
26th Street
Monroe Ave.
2-Way Stop
29th Street
Harrison Ave.
Signalized
30th Street
Western Blvd.
2-Way Stop
30th Street
Washington Way 4-Way Stop
30th Street
Orchard Ave.
2-Way Stop
30th Street
Harrison Ave.
2-Way Stop
35th Street
Highway 34
Signalized
35th Street
Western Blvd.
4-Way Stop
Campus Master Plan
2-Way Stop
Peak Hour
Level of Service
Full
Most BuildExisting Likely
Out
I* A* I
A I A
AM
PM
AM
PM
AM
PM
AM
A
A
C
C
A
A
A
B
D
B
B
A
A
A
D
C
A
A
A
B
D
B
B
A
A
A
D
C
A
A
A
C
E
B
C
A
PM
AM
PM
AM
A
A
B
A
A
A
C
C
A
B
C
A
A
B
C
F
A
B
C
A
B
B
C
F
PM
AM
A
A
D
F
A
C
D
-
A F
C -
PM
AM
PM
AM
PM
AM
PM
AM
PM
AM
PM
AM
PM
AM
PM
AM
PM
AM
PM
AM
PM
B
A
A
A
A
A
A
C
C
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
D
C
F
F
F
C
C
A
A
B
C
B
C
A
A
C
C
D
F
F
F
D
A
A
A
A
A
A
C
C
A
A
B
A
A
A
D
C
D
C
F
F
C
D
B
A
C
D
C
C
B
B
C
C
F
F
F
F
D
A
A
B
B
A
B
D
E
A
A
B
B
A
A
F
F
D
D
F
F
E
E
C
B
C
D
C
C
C
B
C
C
F
F
F
F
6-17
Transportation Plan
Study Intersection
Control Type
North-South
35th Street
East-West
Jefferson Ave.
2-Way Stop
35th Street
Campus Way
2-Way Stop
35th Street
Harrison Ave.
2-Way Stop
36th Street
Harrison Ave.
2-Way Stop
Peak Hour
AM
PM
AM
PM
AM
PM
AM
PM
Level of Service
Full
Most BuildExisting Likely
Out
I* A* I
A I A
A
A
A
A
A
C
B
A
C
C
C
B
E
F
D
D
A
A
A
A
A
F
D
A
E
D
C
C
E
F
F
E
A
B
A
A
A
F
F
B
E
F
C
C
F
F
F
F
* I = Intersection, A = Approach
a.
Intersection Capacity and Mitigation
1.0
Full Build-Out and Most Likely Scenario
Based on the results of the BTM, a number of intersections have capacity issues (LOS F) for the
full build-out scenario as noted below.
The Transportation Improvement Plan was developed to mitigate the failing level of service
(LOS F) for the full build-out scenario.
2.0
Capacity
BTM results identified the following intersections as experiencing capacity issues (LOS F) for
the full build-out scenario:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
9th Street / Jefferson Ave.
15th Street / Washington Way
Park Terrace / Monroe Ave.
26th Street / Highway 34
30th Street / Harrison Blvd.
35th Street / Western Blvd.
35th Street / Jefferson Way
35th Street / Harrison Blvd.
36th Street / Harrison Blvd.
6-18
Campus Master Plan
Transportation Plan
9th Street / Jefferson Way. Currently the 9th Street/Jefferson intersection is unsignalized with a
2-way stop sign that allows for uninterrupted travel on Jefferson. The intersection is operating at
LOS A in the AM and PM peak. For the most likely scenario it is projected to operate at LOS A
and B in the AM and PM peak hours. In the full build-out scenario, AM and PM peaks hours
maintain acceptable levels of service with only the PM peak approach having LOS F.
Signalization is currently planned by the City. Otherwise a separate left turn-lane would provide
mitigation. At this time, no mitigation is proposed, but this intersection will be revaluated as part
of future updates to the Base Transportation Model
15th Street / Washington Way. The 15th Street/Washington Way intersection is currently
experiencing acceptable levels of service in the AM and PM peak hours. It is in the full build-out
scenario that level of service for the approach for the PM peak reaches LOS F. However, this
intersection has some operational deficiencies due to its proximity to the railroad, limited rightof-way (a portion of the Washington Way road is within the railroad right of way), limited sight
distance for southbound movements, and lack of a designated pedestrian/bike crossing on 15th
Street. Mitigation most likely would involve realignment of Washington Way. Improvements
provided with re-development of the site south of Kerr Administration or 80% Assignable Future
Square Footage trigger for the sector per Table 6.9.
Park Terrace / Monroe Ave. Currently, the southbound approach of Park Terrace/Monroe Ave.
is operating at LOS C during the AM peak. For the most likely and full build-out scenarios, the
southbound approach will operate at LOS F during the AM peak. However, this intersection does
not meet the signalization warrants for either the most likely or the full build-out scenario.
(Signal warrant worksheets are in the Technical Appendix.) Furthermore, right-of-way
constraints prevent additional intersection improvements at this location. It should be noted that
the new Kelly Engineering building will remove a parking lot with 117 parking spaces located
directly to the south of this intersection. This will improve operations at this intersection due to
lower peak hour volumes approaching in the northbound direction. Further more the intersection
is not expected to meet MUTCD signal warrants.
26th Street / Highway 34. The southbound approach of 26th Street/Highway 34 was operating at
LOS F during both AM and PM peaks. In the fall of 2003 the intersection was signalized. For
the most likely and full build-out scenarios, the analysis was based on the intersection being
signalized. The signalization will improve the LOS of the intersection to C and D for the AM and
PM peaks, respectively.
30th Street / Harrison Blvd. The southbound approach of 30th Street/Harrison Blvd. is currently
operating at LOS F during the PM peak. For the most likely and full build-out scenarios, the
southbound approach will continue to operate at LOS F. Due to right-of-way constraints,
additional turn bays cannot be added at this intersection. In addition, signalization of this
intersection is restricted by the spacing between this intersection and the signalized intersection
of 29th Street/Harrison Blvd. Two closely spaced signalized intersections would require nonstandard traffic operations at the two intersections.
35th Street / Western Blvd. 35th Street/Western Blvd. is currently a 4-way stop that is operating
at LOS F. For the most likely and full build-out scenarios, the intersection will continue to
operate at LOS F for the AM and PM peaks.
Campus Master Plan
6-19
Transportation Plan
For mitigation, signalization and the addition of an eastbound left turn lane is recommended.
These improvements are included in the Corvallis Capital Improvement Plan.
35th Street / Jefferson Way. The eastbound approach of 35th Street/Jefferson Way will operate
at LOS E during the AM peak for the most likely and full build-out scenarios. In the full buildout scenario, it is projected that the PM peak hour approach will have LOS F. Since this
approach has low traffic volume, potential mitigation measures will be assessed each year as part
of the CMP and BTM updates.
35th Street / Harrison Blvd. 35th Street/Harrison Blvd. is currently a 2-way stop with a
northbound approach that is operating at LOS F during the PM peak. For the full build-out
scenario, LOS of the northbound and southbound approaches deteriorates to F. The city plans to
signalize and add a westbound left turn bay at this intersection. This upgrade is partially funded
from System Development Charges. However, the remaining funding is not available and the
upgrade will proceed when funding is secured. In addition to the planned upgrade, an eastbound
right turn bay should be added for the full build-out scenario.
36th Street / Harrison Blvd. 36th Street/Harrison Blvd. is currently a 2-way stop with a
southbound approach that is operating at LOS D during the PM peak. The LOS of the
southbound approach for the most likely and full build-out scenarios will deteriorate to F.
Upgrade of the intersection will be needed to mitigate this situation. This upgrade is partially
funded from System Development Charges. However, the remaining funding is not available and
the upgrade will proceed when funding is secured.
It should be noted that the Harrison Corridor Study describes preferred solutions to the
intersections described above and the City of Corvallis has been implementing these solutions
over the last couple of years.
6.7
Pedestrian and Bicycle Systems
a.
Pedestrian Network
The travel survey noted that walking to and from campus is the second most popular mode of
travel, with 21 percent and 30 percent respectively for the AM and PM survey periods. For intracampus travel, walking represents 80 percent of the trips.
The majority of campus streets have sidewalks along both sides. There are also walkways
between buildings and across open space areas. Ramps exist at most intersections and strategic
locations along existing streets to allow for wheelchair access. New construction shall include
pedestrian improvements to ensure connectivity. A list of needed pedestrian improvements is at
the end of this section.
6-20
Campus Master Plan
Transportation Plan
b.
Bicycle Network
The current bicycle network consists of on-street bicycle lanes (Figure 6.5). However, there is a
notable gap in the system along 14th/15th Street between Jefferson and Monroe. Additionally,
there are substandard links on 30th Street from Western Blvd. to Washington Way and on 35th
Street from Washington Way to Western Blvd.. Road improvement on 30th Street, including
bicycle lanes, will occur with the Reser Stadium expansion project. 35th Street bicycle lane
improvements will occur with improvements to 35th Street as identified in the OSU-City 35th
Street Improvement Agreement.
Campus Master Plan
6-21
Transportation Plan
Figure 6.4: Existing Bicycle Improvements
6-22
Campus Master Plan
Transportation Plan
Improvement of bicycle facilities shall also be considered on 26th Street, between Monroe and
Washington Way. This would provide for improved north/south travel through the campus.
Existing development along the majority of this roadway will necessitate a variety of
improvements, including on-street facilities or separated paths.
Convenient bicycle parking is generally provided across campus. When bicycle parking is
deficient, additional parking facilities will be provided. The goal is to maintain at least half of the
bicycle parking supply as covered.
Whenever practicable, bicycle parking facilities shall be incorporated into new building design
through the use of roof overhangs, eaves, covered porches, etc. In some cases, it may also be
advantageous to have areas within the building dedicated to bicycle parking. When and where
appropriate, bicycle parking shall be centralized as a parking hub or corral that can serve two or
more buildings.
When covered bicycle parking structures are provided, the design of the structure (e.g., scale,
materials, character) shall be consistent with the architecture of adjacent buildings.
c.
Multi-Use Paths
The campus has a number of multi-use paths. Asphalt paths traverse the lower campus area (11th
Street to 14th Street). Other paths bisect the library and MU quads. A new multi-use path is being
established from 15th Street to 35th Street, immediately south of Washington Way. Portions of
this path are currently under construction. A multi-use path extends westward from Campus Way
and 35th Street, connecting with the Midge Cramer path to Bald Hill Park. A substandard multiuse path exists on 35th Street. When 35th Street road improvements are made, bike facilities will
be included with the improvements.
d.
Pedestrian and Bicycle Improvements
To enhance connectivity on campus, the pedestrian and bicycle network needs the following
improvements:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Bike lanes on 14th/15th Street between Monroe and Jefferson
Sidewalk on the east side of 14th/15th Street
Sidewalk connection between Benton Hall and 14th/15th Street
Bike lanes on 26th Street from Washington Way to Monroe Street
Crosswalk at 15th Street and Washington Way
Completion of the multi-use path on Washington Way
Bike lanes and sidewalks and/or multi-use path on 35th Street
Bike lanes and sidewalks on 30th Street from Western Boulevard to Washington Way
Bicycle improvements on the interior including Campus Way and Jefferson Way
Bike lanes and sidewalks on Brooklane Drive with development of the South Farm site in
accordance with the 1997 Brooklane Drive – Nash Road Corridor Study or as updated
Sidewalks along the north side of Washington Way.
Campus Master Plan
6-23
Transportation Plan
As new development occurs or as needs change, additional pedestrian and bicycle facilities are
needed. These include:
•
•
•
•
•
•
Bike racks to be added with new construction
Bike corrals to be evaluated in areas where bike parking is heavily used
Motor vehicular travel mode restrictions to be considered in areas where conflicts among
vehicles, bicycles and pedestrians result in compromised safety
Additional shelters to be constructed for covered bicycle parking spaces
Bike lockers or secure bicycle parking facilities to be considered throughout campus
Pedestrian and bicycle corridors to be enhanced with crosswalk, lighting, and safety
improvements to promote connectivity to the campus
6.8
Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP)
The Transportation Improvement Plan includes transportation projects to address existing
deficiencies and mitigate anticipated impacts from future OSU development. The Transportation
Improvement Plan will be updated as part of the CMP annual monitoring report. This will ensure
a yearly review and updating of the improvement projects is completed so necessary mitigation
is completed in accordance with the CMP policies 4.1.14, 4.1.15, and 4.1.16.
OSU recognizes the importance of ensuring that adequate mitigation of adverse impact on the
surrounding transportation system’s function, capacity and efficiency (e.g., level of serve) is
completed in conjunction with new development that might result in said impact. OSU will
follow policies that will ensure the CMP and the Transportation Plan is in compliance with the
State’s Transportation Rule during the planning period of CMP.
Any development proposal that impacts the surrounding transportation system beyond acceptable
levels shall incorporate mitigation measures into the scope of the project. If mitigation cannot
occur with the proposed development, then said development will either be delayed or the
project will be redesigned in a manner that does not impact the surrounding transportation
system beyond acceptable levels. These transportation improvement projects (i.e., mitigation)
will occur per LDC standards. In addition to this provision, OSU proposes a 50% improvement
trigger and an 80% improvement trigger. If development exceeds the maximum allowable
square footage for a sector by either 50% or 80%, then vehicular improvement projects identified
in the CMP and TIP will be implemented.
The TIP includes projects for all modes of travel. Mitigation may include functional
improvements such as intersection signalization, street and intersection reconfiguration, restriping, bike lanes, multi use paths, sidewalks and standardization of street improvements in
accordance with a street’s classification, as well as transportation demand management scenarios
as outlined herein.
6-24
Campus Master Plan
Transportation Plan
a.
Transportation Improvements
Table 6.8 identifies the transportation improvements for, both existing deficiencies and proposed
new improvements on a sector by sector basis. Table 6.9 addresses the timing of frontage
improvements not directly triggered by development.
Campus Master Plan
6-25
Transportation Plan
Table 6.8: Transportation Improvements by Sector
Sector
Priority
Level Project No.
Location
Improvement
Funding
Source
Development Trigger
All
Sectors
A-1
Campus Wide
ADA compliant sidewalk upgrades
OSU
As needed to address existing deficiencies and
with new and re-development
All
Sectors
A-2
Campus Wide
Speed tables, lighting, crosswalk painting
and other safety improvements.
OSU
As needed to address existing deficiencies and
with new and re-development
All
Sectors
A-3
Campus Wide
Bike racks and/or corrals, covered and
uncovered
OSU
As needed to address existing deficiencies and
with new and re-development,
B
A-4
Washington Way,
30th Street to 35th
Street
Sidewalk, north side
OSU
Frontage improvements provided with adjacent
development, or 50 % Assignable Future
Buildable Square Footage trigger for the sector
per Table 6.9
C, D
A-5
14th/15th Street,
Monroe Avenue
to Jefferson
Avenue
Bike lanes, intersection re-alignment and
widening, possibly parking
improvements. Additionally, sidewalk
and landscape strip on east side of street
within Sector D
OSU and
potential
grants
Frontage improvements provided with adjacent
development, or 50 % Assignable Future
Buildable Square Footage trigger for the sector
per Table 6.9 or within 5 years from the date the
CMP update is adopted whichever is first.
C
A-6
Washington Way,
26th Street to 15th
Street
Sidewalk improvements along north side
of Washington Way fronting the ROTC
building, west to 26th Street
OSU
Condition of approval for OSU Dixon Recreation
Facility Improvements
6-26
Campus Master Plan
Transportation Plan
E, F
A-7
30th Street,
Washington Way
to Oak Creek
bridge
Street upgrade to include travel and bike
lanes, curb, gutter, landscape strips and
sidewalk (west side).
OSU
Improvements are a condition of approval for the
Vet Med Small Animal Hospital Project or per
Reser Stadium Expansion condition prior to
December 31, 2006
E, F
A-8
30th Street, Oak
Creek bridge to
Western
Boulevard
Street upgrade to include travel and bike
lanes, curb, gutter, landscape strips,
sidewalks and bridge widening
OSU
Improvements are a condition of approval for the
Reser Stadium Expansion - Phase 1 project. If
the Reser Stadium Expansion is not constructed,
development fronting 30th Street in Sector E will
be required to construct the 30th Street
improvements, or 50 % Assignable Future
Buildable Square Footage trigger for the sector
per Table 6.9
E
A-9
35th
Street/Western
Boulevard
intersection
Signalization and addition of turn lanes
City-wide
SDC
Improvements to be considered for 04-05 CIP
update
E
A-10
Washington Way,
30th Street to 35th
Street
Asphalt multi-use path
OSU
Improvements are a condition of approval of the
Vet Med Small Animal Hospital project
F
A-11
Washington Way,
26th Street to 30th
Street
Asphalt multi-use path
OSU
Improvements are a condition of approval for the
Indoor Practice Field project and Gill Annex
project, and must be installed by 2005
F, G
A-12
26th Street,
Western
Boulevard to
Washington Way
26th/Western Intersection improvements
and 26th Street improvements
OSU
Improvements are a condition of approval for the
Reser Stadium Expansion/Parking Structure
Campus Master Plan
6-27
Transportation Plan
All
Sectors
B-1
Campus Wide
Shuttle stops and shelters
OSU
As needed to address existing deficiencies and
with new and re-development
All
Sectors
B-2
Campus Wide
Transit stops and shelters
OSU
As needed to address existing deficiencies and
with new and re-development
A, B
B-3
35th Street,
Campus Way to
Washington Way
Street upgrade, to include travel and bike
lanes, curbs, gutters, landscape strips and
sidewalks
OSU
As per OSU 35th Street Improvement Agreement,
or 80 % Assignable Future Buildable Square
Footage trigger for the sector per Table 6.9
whichever is first
A
B-4
Campus Way,
west of 35th Street
Local street upgrade
OSU
Frontage improvements provided with adjacent
development, or 80 % Assignable Future
Buildable Square Footage trigger for the sector
per Table 6.9 whichever occurs first
B, C
B-5
30th Street,
Orchard Avenue
to Washington
Way
Pavement upgrade
OSU
Frontage improvements provided with adjacent
development
B
B-6
Campus Way,
30th Street to 35th
Street
Pavement upgrade
OSU
Frontage improvements provided with adjacent
development
B
B-7
Jefferson Way,
30th Street to 35th
Street
Pavement upgrade
OSU
Frontage improvements provided with adjacent
development
C
B-8
Benton Place, 14th
Street to Benton
Hall
Sidewalk leading up to Benton Hall from
14th Street
OSU and
potential
grants
Frontage improvements provided with adjacent
development, or 80 % Assignable Future
Buildable Square Footage trigger for the sector
6-28
Campus Master Plan
Transportation Plan
per Table 6.9
C
B-9
26th Street,
Monroe Avenue
to Washington
Way
Bike lanes or other bike facility
improvements
OSU and
potential
grants
Frontage improvements provided with adjacent
development, or 80 % Assignable Future
Buildable Square Footage trigger for the sector
per Table 6.9
C
B-10
Campus Way, 26th
Street to 30th
Street
Pavement upgrade, bike lanes or other
bike facility improvements
OSU
Frontage improvements provided with adjacent
development
C
B-11
Jefferson Way,
26th Street to 30th
Street
Pavement upgrade, bike lanes or other
bike facility improvements
OSU
Frontage improvements provided with adjacent
development
C
B-12
Jefferson Way,
26th Street to
Waldo Place
Bike lanes or other bike facility
improvements
OSU
Frontage improvements provided with adjacent
development, or 80 % Assignable Future
Buildable Square Footage trigger for the sector
per Table 6.9
C
B-13
Memorial Place
Pavement upgrade
OSU
Frontage improvements provided with adjacent
development
C
B-14
Park Terrace
Pavement upgrade
OSU
Frontage improvements provided with adjacent
development
C, G
B-15
Washington
Way/15th Street
intersection
Intersection realignment, turn lane,
sidewalk and crosswalk upgrade.
Coordination with ODOT rail.
OSU
Improvements provided with re-development of
site south of Kerr Admin., or 80 % Assignable
Future Buildable Square Footage trigger for the
sector per Table 6.9
Campus Master Plan
6-29
Transportation Plan
C
B-16
Washington Way,
26th Street to 30th
Street
Sidewalk along north side
OSU
Frontage improvements provided with adjacent
development, or 80 % Assignable Future
Buildable Square Footage trigger for the sector
per Table 6.9
E
B-17
35th Street,
Washington Way
to Western
Boulevard
Street upgrade to include travel and bike
lanes, curbs, gutters, landscape strips and
sidewalks
OSU
As per OSU 35th Street Improvement Agreement,
or 80 % Assignable Future Buildable Square
Footage trigger for the sector per Table 6.9
whichever is first
J
B-18
Brooklane Drive
Road Street improvements to include
travel lanes, curb, gutter sidewalks, bike
lanes or multi-use path in accordance
with the 1995 Brooklane Drive - Nash
Road Corridor study.
OSU and
potential
grants
Improvements associated with development of
the South Farm Property.
Off-site
Improve
-ments
B-19
35th / 36th
Street/Harrison
Boulevard
intersections
Signalize and add westbound turn lane
City-wide
SDC
Scheduled for CIP construction 05-06
Off-site
Improve
-ments
B-20
30th
Street/Harrison
Boulevard
Operation deficiencies of the intersection.
No mitigation recommended
N/A
N/A
Off-site
Improve
-ments
B-21
Jackson Street
Work with neighborhood association on
traffic issues
OSU/City
Ongoing
6-30
Campus Master Plan
Transportation Plan
b.
Prioritization of Improvements
The TIP identifies transportation, bicycle, pedestrian and transit improvements as well as TDM
implementation that both address existing deficiencies and the impacts associated with new
development. Tables 6.8 prioritizes the existing deficiencies and improvements associated with
proposed development. Priority “A” projects have the highest priority. The Campus Planning
Committee will manage the implementation of and assess the condition of the vehicular, bicycle,
pedestrian and transit improvements across the OSU campus on a yearly basis to keep the TIP
current. Transportation Improvement Projects in addition to those in Table 6.8 shall be
identified, prioritized and added to the TIP, following review and approval by the City Engineer.
Completed TIP projects shall be removed from Table 6.8
An improvement development-trigger on a sector by sector basis related to a sector’s
development activity in relation to its allocation of buildable square footage is established
through this CMP.
Improvements not directly associated with development, require a development trigger to ensure
that the transportation system is upgraded as development within a sector occurs. As each new
development projects in a sector, adding to the buildable square footage in that sector,
improvements would be required based on the extent of the buildable square footage and the
priority of the improvements.
Development activity in a sector attaining 50% of the buildable square footage allocated to a
sector as established in CMP, Table 8.3, shall trigger construction of the Priority A
Improvements in a sector as identified in the TIP, Tables 6.8 and 6.9 Development activity in a
sector attaining 80% of the buildable square footage allocated to a sector as established in CMP,
Table 8.3 shall trigger construction of the Priority B Improvements in a sector as identified in the
TIP, Tables 6.8 and 6.9 The improvements triggered by construction of a portion of a sector’s
development allocation are summarized in Table 6.9 below.
Campus Master Plan
6-31
Transportation Plan
Table 6.9: Development Triggers Related to Allocated Buildable Square Footages
Max. Buildable
SF (1000 SF),
Future
Allocation
Priority A
Development
Trigger, 50% of
Future SF
Allocation
A
250 K
125 K
B
500 K
250 K
C
750 K
D
Sector
Priority A
Improvements
(Table 6.8)
Priority B
Development
Trigger, 80% of
Future SF
Allocation
Priority B
Improvements
(Table 6.8)
200 K
B-3, B-4
A-4
400 K
B-3
375 K
A-5
600 K
B-8, B-9, B-12, B-15,
B-16
35 K
17.5 K
A-5
28 K
E
120 K
60 K
A-8
96 K
F
750 K
375 K
A-8
600 K
G
350 K
175 K
280 K
H
50 K
25 K
40 K
J
350 K
175 K
280 K
Campus
Wide
3,155 K
1,577.5 K,
2,524 K
c.
B-17
B-15
Funding of Improvements
Street improvements are currently funded through new construction or as part of OSU’s
operation and maintenance budget provided by the State of Oregon. The amount of funding to
support basic campus infrastructure is authorized each legislative session and can vary,
depending upon funding priorities at the state level.
In recent years, funding from the state legislature has not been adequate to maintain campus
facilities and has resulted in deferred maintenance problems at OSU. Additional funding for
transportation improvement projects from the state is not likely to be appropriated. Therefore,
OSU will continue to explore other funding initiatives such as the recently proposed deferred
maintenance bond measure, grants, donations, and other funding sources that can be used for
transportation improvement projects. Until additional funding is available, most transportation
improvements will generally be provided in conjunction with new construction projects.
Because adequate funding for street and other infrastructure improvements may not be
forthcoming from the state, the OSU administration is proposing a campus-wide development
surcharge for new construction. This surcharge will allow for the collection of funds to pay for
6-32
Campus Master Plan
Transportation Plan
infrastructure upgrades. The funds collected through the development surcharge will be used for
transportation and other infrastructure upgrades.
d.
Timing of Improvements
Transportation, bicycle, pedestrian and transit improvements as well as TDM implementation
shall be provided in accordance with the Corvallis Land Development Code (LDC) and the
Uniform Building Code (UBC). Generally, transportation upgrades are required along a project’s
frontage. Basic improvements such as streets, sidewalks, landscape strips, bike lanes, curbs,
gutters, street lighting, handicapped access ramps, and other safety improvements shall be
provided on the site as part of the project. There may also be instances where improvements are
needed off-site in order to meet the city’s to-and-through policies or to provide continuity of
improvements. Issuance of building permits will be predicated upon adequate public
improvements.
Improvements shall generally be provided in conjunction with new construction projects. The
campus development surcharge will provide a funding source for transportation improvements.
Funds collected from the surcharge may be expended when there are adequate funds to complete
a project. This may occur as a stand-alone project or in conjunction with other development. The
Campus Planning Committee will assist in prioritizing transportation improvement projects
(excluding routine repair and maintenance activities) that are identified in addition to the
improvements listed in the adopted CMP.
If determined by the Campus Panning Committee that a vehicular, bicycle or pedestrian
improvement is needed prior to an improvement’s specific timing trigger, the Campus Planning
Committee shall trigger the appropriate TIP projects to ensure complete continuous vehicular
bicycle or pedestrian connectivity, following review and approval by the City Engineer.
e.
Memorandum of Agreement (MOA)
Currently, when transportation improvements are necessary to offset the impact of development,
they are identified and evaluated during the development’s mandatory discretionary review
process. The CMP alters this current review process and proposes that if a project is consistent
with the CMP and the LDC, the project can be approved at the staff level and need not be subject
to a discretionary review procedure.
Where transportation improvements are required by either the Corvallis Land Development
Code or the CMP, TIP, but cannot feasibly be implemented, a Memorandum of Agreement
(MOA) shall be provided. One such MOA currently exists for 35th Street improvements.
An MOA for transportation improvements could be initiated by either OSU or the city.
Approval of an MOA is at the discretion of the City and will be ultimately approved by the City
Manager. OSU will prepare the MOA and submit to the City for approval consideration. The
MOA would allow for greater detail than is appropriate in a typical master plan and would
provide assurances that improvements will occur in a mutually agreed upon manner. Refer to
Land Development Code Section 3.36.50.09.c for implementation.
Campus Master Plan
6-33
Transportation Plan
6.9
Transportation Demand Management Scenarios
OSU has prepared three transportation demand management (TDM) scenarios, each of which are
discussed below. These scenarios evaluate potential demand management actions that may
reduce the number of vehicle trips and the need for additional capacity-related transportation
improvements beyond that which is required for a street’s given classification.
OSU currently takes the following TDM actions:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Free on-campus shuttle
Guaranteed emergency ride home service for those who carpool, vanpool, or ride the bus to
work
Pre-paid Corvallis Transit System pass for students, faculty, and staff
Participation in Cascades West carpool matching service, or other vehicle pool matching
servcies
Preferred parking for vanpools that are renting government-owned vehicles
Some alternative work and class schedules available
Some telecommuting for work and distance education opportunities
Recently enacted a 50 percent increase in parking costs
a.
TDM Scenario 1
This scenario assumes a 50 percent increase in parking costs. For carpools, this scenario assumes
an in-house ride-matching service, a 0.25 FTE transportation coordinator, and a guaranteed ride
home service to be provided within the City of Corvallis. For vanpools, this scenario assumes a
ride-matching service, a 0.25 FTE transportation coordinator, and OSU participation in vanpool
development by contributing to the cost of vehicle and/or operating expenses. For transit, this
scenario assumes the extension of all Corvallis Transit System routes into the evening, double
headways on the Linn-Benton loop bus, extension of the OSU shuttle service into the evening,
double headways on all Corvallis Transit System routes, and 20 new bus shelters throughout
Corvallis.
b.
TDM Scenario 2
This scenario assumes that no changes are made for drive-alone vehicles or carpools. For
vanpools, this scenario assumes a ride-matching service, a 0.25 FTE transportation coordinator,
and OSU participation in vanpool development on a non-monetary level (such as establishing a
relationship with an outside vanpool service). For transit, this scenario assumes extension of all
Corvallis Transit System routes into the evening, double headways on the Linn-Benton loop bus,
extension of the OSU shuttle service into the evening, double headways on all Corvallis Transit
System routes, and 20 new bus shelters throughout Corvallis.
c.
TDM Scenario 3
For carpools, this scenario assumes an in-house ride-matching service, a 0.25 FTE transportation
coordinator, and a guaranteed ride home service to be provided within the City of Corvallis. For
vanpools, this scenario assumes a ride-matching service, a 0.25 FTE transportation coordinator,
6-34
Campus Master Plan
Transportation Plan
and OSU participation in vanpool development by contributing to the cost of vehicle and/or
operating expenses. This scenario assumes no improvements are made for transit.
TDM Scenario 3 implementation shall occur immediately following adoption of this CMP.
Refer to CMP Tables 6.8 and 6.9 for TDM Scenario timing.
Table 6.10 identifies the three TDM scenarios and the effect the actions in each scenario would
have on the various modes of travel. A level of support of 1 indicates the highest level, while 4
indicates the lowest level.
Table 6.10: Transportation Demand Management Scenarios
TDM
Scenario
1
2
3
Program Entries
Level of Support
Walk time
Cost
Level of Support
Walk time
Cost
Level of Support
Walk time
Cost
Campus Master Plan
Drive
Alone
0 min
$0.50
0 min
$0.00
0 min
$0.00
Carpool
3
0 min
$0.50
1
0 min
$0.00
3
0 min
$0.00
Vanpool
2
0 min
-$0.50
1
0 min
$0.00
2
0 min
-$0.50
Transit
4
-15 min
$0.00
4
-15 min
$0.00
2
0 min
$0.00
Vehicle
Trip
Reduction
%
10.7%
5.9%
3%
6-35
Transportation Plan
Table 6.11 shows the vehicle trips generated for the most likely and full build-out scenarios and
the adjusted number of trips based on the three TDM scenarios.
Table 6.11: Trips Generated by TDM Scenarios
Scenario
Existing AM
Existing PM
Most Likely AM
Most Likely PM
Full Build-out
AM
Full Build-Out
PM
Most Likely AM
TDM 1
Most Likely PM
TDM 1
Most Likely AM
TDM 2
Most Likely PM
TDM 2
Most Likely AM
TDM 3
Most Likely PM
TDM 3
HBO HBSch HBW
HBO HBSch HBW NHB Total
PM* PM
PM NHB PM Total PM AM
AM
AM AM AM
55
289
163 128
431 1,202
315
766
661
2688
344
224
71
377
179 163
473 1,525
404
984
817
3359
449
293
1,005 4,049 1037 6,540
99
90 499 981
183
190
451
884
497
1,025 4,715 1,158 7,395
483 1,776
1099
3776
324
101
105
557 1,087
145
361
730
401
897 3,616
926 5,840
423 1,362
879
3001
261
169
153
380
769
422
445 1,435
926
3161
275
174
158
392
793
435
459 1,480
955
3260
284
60
418
64
337
67
355
69
366
160
916 3,191
90
71
88
81
946 3,810
93
85
807 5,258
388 773
446
876
976 6,154
470
923
975 3,928 1,006 6,344
96
88
484
952
* HBO - Home Based Other; HBSch - Home Based School; HBW - Home Based Work; NHB - Non Home Based. All
data subject to revision based on ongoing review and analysis.
6-36
Campus Master Plan
Transportation Plan
Table 6.12 shows the increase in vehicle trips above the existing levels for the most likely and
full build-out scenarios and the adjusted number of trips based on the three TDM scenarios.
Table 6.12: Percentage Increase of Trips above Current Levels by TDM Scenarios
SCENARIO
Most Likely AM
Most Likely PM
Full Build-out
AM
Full Build-out
PM
Most Likely AM
TDM 1
Most Likely PM
TDM 1
Most Likely AM
TDM 2
Most Likely PM
TDM 2
Most Likely AM
TDM 3
Most Likely PM
TDM 3
HBO
PM*
HBSch
PM
HBW
PM
NHB
PM
Total
PM
HBO
AM
HBSch
AM
HBW
NHB
Total
AM
31%
31%
10%
10%
27%
27%
28%
28%
24%
25%
31%
31%
10%
10%
27%
27%
28%
28%
24%
27%
10%
12%
48%
43%
34%
45%
12%
48%
43%
41%
45%
12%
48%
43%
40%
45%
12%
48%
43%
41%
17%
-2%
13%
15%
10%
17%
-2%
13%
15%
11%
17%
-2%
13%
15%
12%
17%
-2%
13%
15%
13%
23%
3%
19%
21%
16%
23%
3%
19%
21%
17%
23%
3%
19%
21%
18%
23%
3%
19%
21%
19%
27%
6%
23%
25%
20%
27%
6%
23%
25%
21%
27%
6%
23%
25%
21%
27%
6%
23%
25%
23%
* HBO - Home Based Other; HBSch - Home Based School; HBW - Home Based Work; NHB - Non Home Based. All
data subject to revision based on ongoing review and analysis.
The most likely development scenario results in a 24 to 77 percent increase in the total number
of AM and PM trips. However, in both the AM and PM periods, Home Base School has an
increase of 10 percent over existing conditions. The full build-out scenario results in an increase
of 34 to 40 percent for both AM and PM trips, with the greatest increase occurring in Home Base
Work (48 percent) for both AM and PM trips.
It is interesting to note that if the actions outlined in Scenario 1 and 2 were undertaken,
transportation impacts of CMP future development would be similar to current conditions. If
either TDM Scenario 1 or 2 were implemented, this would help to offset the traffic impacts from
the most likely scenario. For the full build-out scenario, TDM strategies are projected to lessen
the anticipated amount of traffic. It will be important to monitor transportation impacts to
determine if the identified improvements will continue to be needed in the future.
Campus Master Plan
6-37
Transportation Plan
6.10 Transit Systems
a.
Corvallis Transit System
OSU currently participates in the Corvallis Transit System’s pre-paid transit pass program. All
OSU students, faculty, and staff can ride Corvallis Transit System (CTS) by showing their OSU
identification cards. This ensures that cost of transit service is not a factor in their transportation
mode choice.
The OSU campus is on CTS Routes 1, 3, 5, 6, 7 and 8. Routes 1, 3, 7 and 8 are hourly while
Routes 5 and 6 are every half-hour. Weekday service starts at 6:15 AM (Route 6) at the
intermodal Mall, with the last run leaving the Intermodal Mall at 7:05 PM (Route 1). Saturday
service starts at 9:20 AM (Route 7) at the Intermodal Mall, with the last runs leaving the
Intermodal Mall at 4:15 PM (Routes 3, 5 and 6).
CTS has ten scheduled stops along the perimeter and within campus, as shown in Table 6.15.
Table 6.13: Corvallis Transit Bus System Scheduled Stops at OSU
CTS Route
Location
Time the bus is at this location
1
Monroe Avenue at 14th Street
:35 after the hour
3
26th Street at Reser Stadium
:45 after the hour
3
35th Street at Western Boulevard
:00 on the hour
3
Jefferson Avenue at 15th Street
:05 after the hour
5
Kings Boulevard at Monroe Avenue
:00 on the hour and :30 after the hour
6
Jefferson Avenue at 15th Street
:55 after the hour and :25 after the hour
7
Monroe Avenue at Kings Boulevard
:10 after the hour
8
Jefferson Way at 30th Street
:35 after the hour
8
Western Boulevard at 35th Street
:50 after the hour
8
Jefferson Avenue at 15th Street
:55 after the hour
Source: Corvallis Transit, Service Route, Map and Schedule. Effective June 1, 1999
OSU plans to continue participation in the pre-paid ride program. Recently, increased enrollment
and the propensity of students to drive to campus have raised parking demand. OSU is trying to
meet this parking demand and mitigate the impact on local residents through the OSU shuttle
service, which improves accessibility to more distant parking facilities such as those at Reser
Stadium.
6-38
Campus Master Plan
Transportation Plan
Additionally, OSU is working with local transit authorities to institute a Transportation Demand
Base Management strategy to encourage alternative methods of commuting. This includes
promoting increasing the cost of parking, increasing availability and awareness of carpools and
vanpools, bicycling, walking, telecommuting, and alternative work hours, among other
strategies.
b.
Linn-Benton Loop System
The Linn-Benton Loop System also provides transit service to the campus, with a stop at 15th
Street and Jefferson Way. OSU currently provides some financial support to the Linn-Benton
Loop System. OSU will consider future support of the system as a TDM measure.
c.
OSU Shuttle System
To help offset the increasing demand for parking and to minimize intra-campus vehicular trips,
OSU implemented a shuttle system in January 2000.
The shuttle buses operate Monday through Friday between 7:30 AM and 6:30 PM over the
academic year. The East Shuttle Route covers the eastern portion of campus, and the West
Shuttle Route covers the western portion of campus.
Table 6.14: OSU Shuttle Ridership
Term
Winter 2000
Spring 2000
Fall 2000
Winter 2001
Spring 2001
Fall 2001
Winter 2002
Spring 2002
Fall 2002
Winter 2003
Spring 2003
Fall 2003*
Ridership
12,546
15,334
32,387
42,893
38,872
56,450
75,703
60,309
64,549
69,176
56,139
TBD
Year Total
60,267
138,215
200,561
125,315
* Year total figure does not include Fall 2003
Shuttle ridership has increased significantly since the shuttle’s introduction. The shuttle is a key
component of both the transportation and parking plans. It improves intra-campus travel and also
allows for better usage of parking facilities. In most cases, the shuttle provides better campus
destination accessibility than does a private automobile.
Campus Master Plan
6-39
Transportation Plan
d.
Options for Improving Transit Systems
The goals of any transit system improvement strategy are to improve access to the transit system
and increase the frequency of trips. By expanding the hours of operation and adding additional
buses, the frequency of service can increase and better access to the transit system can be
provided. Oregon State University shall fund the additional CTS operating expenses associated
with increased hours of operation, doubling of headways and new bus shelters benefiting OSU
Campus.
Another improvement to the transit system on campus is to make transit routes (both for OSU
and CTS) safer. It is not uncommon for buses to travel across campus during periods of high
pedestrian traffic volumes. Consolidating transit stops to reduce the number of stops and traffic
merging maneuvers (without compromising transit ridership opportunities), along with
centralizing CTS transit stops to key locations, could help improve transit system efficiency and
increase safety on campus.
Other options for improving transit systems include:
•
Extend CTS hours of service into the evening.
•
Improve service times for those areas that have hourly service. Focus on the locations where
students live. Shorter headways could be implemented as a seasonal service.
•
Provide more frequent service between OSU and LBCC. The loop bus currently runs hourly.
Between 10 AM and 2 PM, the route runs as an express, which allows students to travel
between OSU and LBCC on an hourly basis. The service is less frequent in the early morning
and late afternoon. More riders could be attracted to the route if headways were shorter and if
the service were extended into the evenings.
•
Construct more shelters at bus stops.
•
Expand the on-campus shuttle service as the student population grows. Use bigger buses or
add a third route, if needed. Include new outlying parking lots in the shuttle routes. Service
should be extended into the evening.
•
Review mechanisms to improve efficiencies and operating costs (e.g., develop transit hubs at
key locations for CTS and coordinate OSU shuttles from these areas).
6-40
Campus Master Plan
CAMPUS MASTER PLAN
2004-2015
Chapter 7 – Parking Plan
Parking Plan
7.0 Parking Plan
7.1
Purpose of the Parking Plan
The CMP’s parking plan was developed to address OSU’s future parking needs. The purpose of
the parking plan is as follows:
•
Identify parking policies and current and future parking needs;
•
Fulfill the city’s requirements related to parking impacts from campus development, thereby
eliminating the need for individual public hearing reviews for those projects consistent with
the approved CMP;
•
Develop a procedure for proceeding with new construction projects that are not consistent
with the approved CMP and/or for addressing deficiencies in the parking supply;
•
Determine the existing supply and demand for on-campus parking facilities;
•
Compare past and present parking supply and demand;
•
Develop an inter-modal transportation program for the efficient management of the parking
supply in relation to campus needs and future development;
•
Identify parking improvement project funding sources;
•
Evaluate Transportation Demand Management (TDM) measures that are viable for the
university and the city; and
•
Determine how improvements to the parking system will be implemented.
7.2
Parking Policies
7.2.1
Provide parking facilities to meet the needs of the campus community. Where possible,
provide adequate parking convenient to the area or site it serves or develop satellite or
remote parking facilities with adequate shuttle service.
7.2.2
Provide parking improvements for bicycles and motor vehicles.
7.2.3
Consider and implement Transportation Demand Management (TDM) principles whenever
possible to avoid or delay construction of new parking facilities.
Campus Master Plan
7-1
Parking Plan
7.2.4
Participate in existing rideshare programs and implement other incentives to encourage
and support carpooling and vanpooling.
7.2.5
Consider parking improvements as a component of the physical development of campus.
Parking improvements may be constructed as part of the on-going operation of the
university as well as with new construction or expansions of existing buildings.
7.2.6
Develop future parking facilities based on usage of existing parking facilities:
a) If the usage of existing parking facilities is less than 90 percent as per the most
recent parking inventory, vehicular parking improvements may be postponed until
occupancy rates are 90 percent or greater; or
b) If the usage of existing parking facilities is 90 percent or greater, parking
improvements may be constructed independent of new construction projects, or if
a new construction project exceeds 5,000 square feet, it shall provide additional
parking improvements in accordance with the Corvallis Land Development Code.
7.2.7
If the usage of existing parking facilities is 85 percent or greater, planning for parking
improvements shall be initiated so that a parking improvement project is ready for
construction if parking usage will exceed 90 percent or when a new construction project is
proposed.
7.2.8
Locate parking improvements in accordance with the general locations identified on the
Future Parking Facilities map (Figure 7.3). Parking improvements associated with a
particular development project, however, may be provided in the vicinity of that project.
7.2.9
Manage parking such so that all parking improvements on campus are used. This will
require the use of a shuttle to transport people from more distant parking areas into the core
of campus.
7.2.10 Manage parking as a unit by monitoring parking usage rates at least once per year and by
providing monitoring results to the city.
7.2.11 Manage parking impacts in the neighborhoods surrounding the university through a
neighborhood parking program administered by the City of Corvallis with possible funding
assistance from OSU.
7.2.12 Continue to work with the surrounding neighborhoods to identify potential changes to
residential parking districts to more effectively discourage students, faculty, and staff from
parking in the surrounding community.
7-2
Campus Master Plan
Parking Plan
7.2.13 OSU shall participate in a neighborhood task force in accordance with Appendix C of the
CMP. If other task forces are formed and approved by the City to review parking
conditions within other geographical areas adjacent to the OSU District Boundary, then
OSU shall participate in those task forces as well.
7.3
Parking Plan Development
OSU has been a major institution in Corvallis and Oregon for close to a century. In anticipation
of the CMP’s upcoming 10- to 12-year planning period and a projected student enrollment of
22,500 with 5,100 faculty and staff, the university conducted an outreach effort to determine
neighborhood parking strategies. This effort solicited ideas from the community about ways to
address parking-related impacts in the neighborhoods.
Community meetings were conducted in the fall of 2000 and spring of 2001. More recently,
three meetings were held in the spring of 2003 with a follow-up meeting in the summer of 2003.
The following summarizes the comments collected during the community outreach:
•
Locate a parking structure on the site directly east of Gill Coliseum;
•
Locate a second parking structure (if needed in the future) in the area immediately behind
Kerr Administration Building;
•
Develop future at-grade parking lots at various locations around campus in addition to the
proposed parking structure behind Kerr Administration Building;
•
Work with the surrounding neighborhoods to address parking impacts. Residents expressed
concern about the fairness of paying for parking in their own neighborhood and the
inconvenience related to program administration;
•
Provide additional discussion in the plan text related to pedestrian safety.
Campus Master Plan
7-3
Parking Plan
Figure 7.1: Existing Parking Facilities
7-4
Campus Master Plan
Parking Plan
7.4
Current Parking Inventory
Parking facilities on the OSU campus consist of parking lots and on-street spaces. The campus
currently has approximately 86 paved and 11 gravel lots. On-street parking is available on 14th
and 15th streets and other roadways adjacent to the campus. The lots and on-street spaces are
controlled by the OSU permit system except for one “open” parking lot that is free for anyone to
use. The free lot is located adjacent to the Hilton Garden Inn, south of Western Boulevard. There
are also meter-controlled lots near the center of campus, Dixon Recreation Center, and LaSells
Stewart Center.
OSU conducts parking inventories every fall and spring term when enrollment is highest. The
inventories occur the fourth week of the term during peak class hours on Tuesday and
Wednesday. Historically, parking facility usage has been higher in fall term than in spring term.
The number of parking spaces available for use also fluctuates due to variables including
landscaping, re-striping and paving improvements, use of spaces for construction staging areas,
and other temporary uses that occur within parking lot areas.
For each parking inventory, parking usage is calculated as the ratio of occupied spaces to the
total number of spaces. A large parking lot (one with 100 or more spaces) is considered full
when it is 95 percent occupied during peak hours. Smaller lots (those with fewer than 100
spaces) are considered full when peak hour usage is 90 percent or above. When lots exceed the
95 percent usage, drivers may spend considerable time circulating in search of a parking space.
Table 7.1 summarizes the available parking spaces by lot type over the past few years.
Table 7.1: Available Parking Spaces by Lot Type
Faculty & Staff
Students & Visitors
Handicapped
Non-Permit
Total
Fall
Spring Fall 2001 Spring
Fall Spring
2000
2001
2002
2002
2003
2,068
2,066
2,066
2,034 2,064
2,020
2,847
2,903
2,903
2,913 2,990
3,002
155
157
157
161
169
180
2,870
2,870
2,870
2,836 2,518
2,512
7,940
7,996
7,996
7,944 7,741
7,714
Table 7.2: Parking Usage by Lot Type
Fall 2002
Faculty & Staff
Students & Visitors
Handicapped
Non-Permit
Total
Campus Master Plan
Parking
Spaces
2,064
2,990
169
2,518
7,741
Occupancy
1,866
2,780
69
2,011
6,726
Spring 2003
%
Occupied
90%
93%
41%
80%
86%
Parking
Spaces
2,020
3,002
180
2,512
7,714
Occupancy
1,811
2,536
70
1,967
6,384
%
Occupied
90%
84%
39%
69%
83%
7-5
Parking Plan
Table 7.3: Headcount and Parking Summary
Faculty & Staff Headcount
Student Headcount
Total Headcount
Total Parking Occupancy
Total Campus Parking
Spaces
a.
Fall
2000
3,341
16,800
20,141
5,966
7,940
Spring Fall
2001
2001
3,962
4,027
17,920 18,067
21,882 22,094
6,255
6,542
7,996
7,996
Spring Fall
2002
2002
4,027
4,159
18,067 18,789
22,094 22,948
6,190
6,726
7,944
7,741
Spring
2003
4,159
18,789
22,948
6,384
7,714
Fall
2003
4,159
18,979
23,138
6,061
7,609
Parking Usage by Sector
The CMP divides the campus into nine development sectors. Table 7.4 shows parking demand
and usage by sector.
Table 7.4: Parking Usage by Sector
Fall 2002
Sector
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
J
Total
Total
%
Sector
Spaces Occupancy Occupied
129
52
40%
A
1,165
932
80%
B
2,928
2,683
92%
C
1,064
971
91%
D
284
163
57%
E
1,460
1,258
86%
F
666
659
93%
G
45
8
18%
H
0
0
0
J
7,741
6,726
86%
Total
Spring 2003
Total
Spaces Occupancy % Occupied
129
96
74%
1,165
886
76%
2,930
2,746
94%
1,064
855
80%
284
171
60%
1,460
1,074
74%
637
553
87%
45
4
9%
0
0
0
7,714
6,384
83%
Sector C, the core campus area, maintains the highest number of parking spaces and has a 92
percent to 94 percent usage rate. Sectors D and G also have high usage rates at 91 percent and 93
percent, respectively. Sector D parking areas are close to the campus core and thus desirable for
parking. Sector G contains three dormitories, the LaSells Stewart Center, CH2M Hill Alumni
Center, and is near the Dixon Recreation Center, which is a major short-term destination.
Sector F usage is remarkably higher than in past studies. Most of Sector F had free parking
(around Reser Stadium). The introduction of the shuttle service increased usage of the lot. Due to
a rate structure change, in fall 2003 the lot was changed to permit required. Another lot, located
south of Western Boulevard, was made available for free parking. OSU will monitor the impact
of the change and consider adjustments as needed.
7-6
Campus Master Plan
Parking Plan
7.5
Current Parking Management Program
A parking management program consists of strategies to make the best use of parking resources.
These strategies typically include adjustments to parking locations, costs, and supply and
demand.
OSU’s parking management program employs a permit system for most of the parking lots, a
pay-lot system for short-term metered parking, a campus shuttle, and enforced parking
throughout the campus and in adjacent neighborhoods. In addition, parking supply and location
are set up to encourage alternative modes of transportation.
a.
Permit System
OSU’s parking permit system manages the majority of the parking spaces. Permits are sold by
use type: faculty/staff, student, emeritus, motorcycle, and visitor. The parking spaces are
assigned according to their permitted use. After obtaining a temporary permit, visitors are
allowed to park in student lots. Those with faculty/staff permits are also allowed to use the
student lots.
Special permits are available for service vehicles on campus. Service permits allow vehicles to
park almost anywhere on campus except loading zones, no-parking areas, and handicapped
spaces.
Parking restrictions are in effect from 7:00 AM to 5:00 PM, Monday through Friday. Parking
permits are sold through the Facilities Services/Parking Services division.
Table 7.5 on the next page shows the number of parking permits issued and the cost (to a faculty
member, a staff member, or a student) per year.
Campus Master Plan
7-7
Parking Plan
Table 7.5: Parking Permits Issued and Cost Per Year
Academic
Year
2003-2004
2002-2003
2001-2002
2000-2001
1999-2000
1998-1999
1997-1998
1996-1997
1995-1996
1994-1995
1993-1994
1992-1993
1991-1992
1990-1991
1989-1990
1988-1989
Faculty/Staff
# of Permits
Cost/Year
N/A
$165
3,160
$110
3,090
$110
3,184
$110
3,437
$90
2,971
$90
3,046
$90
3,008
$90
2,936
$90
2,835
$90
2,461
$90
2,268
$87
2,167
$77
2,700
$77
2,750
$77
2,855
$40
Student
# of Permits
Cost/Year
N/A
$120
5,270
$80
4,830
$80
4,866
$80
5,308
$65
4,931
$65
4,754
$65
3,957
$65
4,450
$65
3,951
$65
3,661
$65
4,192
$62
4,282
$52
5,300
$52
5,417
$52
6,562
$27
To help fund additional parking improvements, parking permit prices were increased in the fall
of 2003. Fee increases typically result in a decline in permit sales during the first year. With each
passing year, however, permit sales increase to pre-increase levels.
Permit pricing is a sensitive issue and requires a balancing of objectives. Fees must be high
enough to pay for improvements (shuttle, pavement, lights, landscaping, maintenance, structures,
etc.) and serve as an incentive to encourage people to use alternative modes of travel, if
available. Fees must also be low enough to be regarded as a reasonable value for the service.
Overtime fees may periodically be adjusted.
b.
Pay-Lot System
The university operates a 102-space pay lot between the Memorial Union and Valley Library off
of Jefferson Street. The lot is monitored Monday through Friday between 7:30 AM and 8:30 PM
and on Saturdays from 7:30 AM to 5:00 PM. The majority of the spaces have metered parking
with a maximum stay of 1 hour.
Smaller metered parking lots or spaces are available around the Kerr Administration Building
and Dixon Recreation Center. A visitor lot across the street from LaSells Stewart Center has
2-hour maximum stay meters. Daily visitor passes can also be purchased from the Parking
7-8
Campus Master Plan
Parking Plan
Services office or park-and-pay stations located throughout the campus. This pass allows a
visitor to park in any student lot on campus or in any pay lot.
On-street metered parking is also available on Monroe Street, on the north side of campus. This
parking is provided and enforced by the City of Corvallis. Metered hours are from 9:00 AM to
5:00 PM, Monday through Friday. Approximately 80 percent of the meters allow a 50-minute
stay, and others allow a 20-minute stay. Parking costs an average of 5 cents for 10 minutes.
c.
Campus Shuttle
OSU currently operates a free shuttle bus that stops every 15 minutes at all parking lots and most
buildings on campus. Shuttle service was initiated in winter 2000 and ridership has been
increasing steadily. In addition to improving access to more remote parking areas, the shuttle has
helped reduce vehicular cross-campus trips. The shuttle is currently funded through the OSU
parking fund.
Continuation of the shuttle system is one of the key elements in the OSU parking plan. The
shuttle provides reasonable access to all parking areas. This accessibility is the reason that
parking is managed as a campus-wide resource and not just as a sector resource. If the shuttle
system were discontinued for any reason, management of parking as a campus-wide resource
would need to be revised. This revision would require that future development provide parking
within a reasonable distance (same sector or adjacent sector if within a 10-minute walk) of the
new development.
Table 7.6: Shuttle Ridership by Term and Academic Year
1999-2000
N/A
12,546
15,334
27,880
Fall
Winter
Spring
Total
d.
2000-2001
32,387
42,893
38,872
114,152
2001-2002
56,450
75,703
60,309
192,462
2002-2003
64,549
75,408
56,139
196,096
On-Campus Parking Enforcement
The Parking Services division of the Facilities Services Department monitors and enforces
on-campus parking regulations. The most common offenses are “no campus permit displayed”
and “timed parking violation.” Table 7.7 on the next page lists the number of citations issued per
academic year.
Campus Master Plan
7-9
Parking Plan
Table 7.7: On-Campus Parking Enforcement Citations
Academic Year
2002-2003
2001-2002
2000-2001
1999-2000
1998-1999
1997-1998
1996-1997
1995-1996
Citations Issued
25,678
27,718
22,823
25,338
23,067
25,746
25,474
25,607
7.6
Off-Campus Parking
a.
Neighborhood Parking Districts
OSU-bound vehicles often park on neighborhood streets near campus. This is most common on
the north side of campus where many classroom buildings but few parking lots exist. The
neighborhoods northwest, east, and southeast of campus are also impacted by OSU boundvehicles parking in the neighborhood, although to a lesser extent. In the 1980s, neighborhood
parking districts were established as a management tool to identify actions that would discourage
OSU-bound traffic from parking in the neighborhoods. As shown in Figure 7.2, there are
presently two defined parking districts. District A is the area between NW 27th Street and NW
31st Street from NW Johnson Avenue to NW Van Buren Avenue. District B is the area between
NW 14th Street and NW 23rd Street from NW Monroe Avenue to NW Harrison Boulevard.
Residents of both parking districts can purchase annual parking permits of $12 per vehicle.
Vehicles without parking permits are limited to a 2-hour stay. OSU inventoried on-street
parking usage in spring 2003 when the campus inventory was performed. Inventory results were
shared with city officials and representatives of the neighborhood associations near the
university. OSU will complete a survey of the existing neighborhoods districts each fall to
assist efforts to measure and monitor impact of parking on the neighborhoods. Table 7.8
summarizes the inventory effort.
Table 7.8: Neighborhood Parking Usage
Total Spaces
Total Occupied
Percent Used
7-10
District A
Spring 2003
254
142
56%
District A Fall
2003
200
152
76%
District B Spring
2004
391
283
72%
District B Fall
2004
371
279
75%
Campus Master Plan
Parking Plan
Figure 7.2: City Parking Districts
Campus Master Plan
7-11
Parking Plan
b.
Off-Campus Peak Hour Usage
Off-campus usage mirrors on-campus usage with a peak use time of 11 AM to 1 PM. The street
parking inventory showed higher usage in District B where there are more multi-family
residences and commercial businesses. The inventory also noted that where parking spaces are
not clearly marked, parking is not as efficient as possible. The result is a haphazard parking
pattern in which more parking spaces appear available than are actually available. Tables 7.9 and
7.10 show parking usage, by time period, in each district.
Table 7.9: District A, Neighborhood Parking Usage by Time Period
District A
Time
9 AM – 11 AM
11 AM – 1 PM
1 PM – 3 PM
3 PM – 5 PM
5 PM – 7 PM
Total
Spaces
254
254
254
254
254
Resident
Occupied
63
70
60
58
22
Non-Resident
Occupied
79
80
68
66
75
Total
Occupied
142
150
128
124
97
Percent Usage
56%
59%
50%
50%
38%
Table 7.10: District B, Neighborhood Parking Usage by Time Period
District B
Time
9 AM – 11 AM
11 AM – 1 PM
1 PM – 3 PM
3 PM – 5 PM
5 PM – 7 PM
Total
Spaces
391
391
391
391
391
Resident
Occupied
112
116
120
113
83
NonResident
Occupied
171
167
156
137
142
Meter
Occupied*
19
36
22
22
30
Total
Occupied
302
319
298
272
255
Percent
Usage
77%
82%
76%
70%
65%
* District B includes on-street metered parking
7-12
Campus Master Plan
Parking Plan
c.
Off-Campus Management Options
To identify potential actions to further reduce neighborhood parking impacts, those attending
CMP outreach meetings provided input relating to six proposed management approaches:
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)
Reduce parking time limits from 2 hours to 1 hour;
Increase parking ticket fines;
Increase enforcement;
Allow residents to park free (visitors pay);
Revise parking district boundaries; and
Create new parking districts.
Of these ideas, no clear direction was provided. However, one consistent theme was identified
during the outreach effort: residents in the parking districts felt that it was unfair that they had to
pay to park in their own neighborhoods (unlike any other residential area in the city). Residents
also spoke of the inconvenience in obtaining a residential parking permit (e.g., going to City
Hall, filling out paperwork, etc).
7.7 Recommended Action Plan for Off-Campus Parking
Management
OSU is willing to work with the city and surrounding neighborhoods to address off-campus
parking concerns, as follows:
a) Conduct annual parking usage inventories in the neighborhood parking districts, in
conjunction with OSU inventory efforts, to monitor parking trends.
OSU staff will inventory parking usage in the two existing residential parking districts and
report inventory results annually to the city and to neighborhood associations that formally
request the information. The inventories will help OSU identify those actions that could
lessen negative impacts to the districts and that contributed to increased impacts. As needed,
OSU will identify potential mitigation actions, which could include: reducing the 2-hour
parking to 1 hour, increasing enforcement of the districts, changing the existing residential
permit program so that visitors pay and residents park for free, and enlarging district
boundaries.
b) Work with the city and surrounding neighborhoods, and study other areas as needed.
OSU and the city will meet periodically to review parking issues in the areas surrounding the
university. As needed, additional usage inventories will be undertaken to gain a better
understanding of the parking issues and trends and to identify areas where additional
management responses may be needed.
Campus Master Plan
7-13
Parking Plan
c) Participate financially in the implementation of the neighborhood parking districts based on a
pre-determined and agreed upon level of support.
OSU will work with the city to determine the most effective manner in which OSU can
support the neighborhood parking districts. This could include financial support to reduce the
city cost for administering the residential parking program. Other possible alternatives
include OSU subsidizing residential permits up to a certain dollar amount or using OSU’s
Parking Services division to distribute residential parking permits.
7.8
Parking Demand Assessment
The CMP calculates parking demand as the ratio of occupied parking spaces to the total number
of parking spaces. Historically, the faculty and staff population has a higher parking demand
ratio than does the student population.
Table 7.11: Historical Parking Demand
Year*
02-03
00-01
99-00
98-99
95-96
Headcount
Faculty/
Student
Staff
4,159
18,789
4,002
16,788
3,962
16,201
3,341
14,618
3,975
14,161
Parked Vehicles
Faculty/
Student Other
Staff
1,866
2,738
2,080
1,915
2,630
1,765
2,007
2,567
1,991
1,853
2,527
1,466
1,779
2,360
1,257
Parking Demand Ratio
Faculty/
Student All
Staff
0.45
0.15
0.29
0.48
0.16
0.30
0.51
0.16
0.32
0.55
0.17
0.32
0.45
0.17
0.30
* Data unavailable for 1996-97, 1997-98, and 2001-02.
a.
Future Parking Demand
The CMP projects a population of 22,500 students and 5,100 faculty and staff by the year 2015.
Based on an averaged projection of demand, approximately 1,212 to 1,536 additional spaces will
be needed by then. The spaces would be distributed approximately equally between students and
faculty/staff.
7-14
Campus Master Plan
Parking Plan
Figure 7.3: Future Parking Facilities
Campus Master Plan
7-15
Parking Plan
Table 7.12: Population Increase
Group
Students
Faculty/Staff
Total
Fall 2002
Population
18,789
4,159
22,948
Future 2015
Population
22,500
5,100
27,600
Increase in
Population
3,711
941
4,652
Table 7.13: Future Parking Demand
Group
Students
Faculty/Staff
Total
Historical
Average (from
Increase in
Population
3,711
941
4,652
4,652
Demand
Ratio
0.17
0.50
0.30
Number of
Required
Parking Spaces
631
471
1,102
1,396
Adjusted
for 90%
Occupancy
694
518
1,212
1,536
Table 7.11)
Table 7.13 lists the number of needed spaces adjusted for 90 percent occupancy. Long-term, an
anticipated 1,212 to 1,536 additional parking spaces are needed.
b.
Future Parking Supply
As noted above, the campus will require approximately 1,212 to 1,536 additional parking spaces
to accommodate OSU’s projected population growth. This estimate assumes that no new
Transportation Demand Management (TDM) measures are implemented to address parking
demand. (This does not mean that TDM measures will not be considered or implemented, but
that parking facility planning must be prepared to address the worst-case scenario.)
Figure 7.3 shows two locations for parking structures and additional at-grade parking lots. The
expected timeline for providing the parking structure at the southeast corner of 26th Street and
Washington Way is fall term 2005. The structure will add approximately 720 new parking spaces
to Sector G. To compensate for the loss of existing parking spaces during construction,
additional temporary at-grade spaces will be provided in nearby areas.
After the parking structure at 26th Street and Washington Way is constructed, future parking
improvements will be provided as needed, based on usage inventories. If TDM strategies are
implemented, single-occupant vehicle usage on campus would be reduced, which would in turn
reduce parking lot usage rates. TDM measures could therefore help forestall or reduce the need
for additional parking improvements.
7-16
Campus Master Plan
Parking Plan
7.9
Parking and Alternative Transportation
The parking plan’s purpose and policies were stated earlier in sections 7.1 and 7.2, respectively.
In addition, the parking plan seeks to measure and manage OSU’s parking supply to maintain an
adequate and available supply of parking facilities to meet campus needs. The intent is to first
promote alternative modes of transportation, thereby eliminating or reducing the need to
construct additional parking facilities. OSU encourages the use of mass transit service. Currently,
OSU participates in a pre-paid transit pass program with the Corvallis Transit Service. This
program allows all students, faculty, and staff to ride the bus after showing their OSU
identification. By encouraging the use of mass transit, fewer parking spaces are needed.
OSU also minimizes the need for additional parking facilities by encouraging students and
faculty to walk, bike, or take mass transit; by encouraging varied scheduling of events and
classes throughout the day and evening to better manage peak demands; and by encouraging
carpools, vanpools, and other modes of transportation beyond the single-occupant automobile.
7.10 Bicycle Parking
Bike racks are provided throughout the campus at the entrances of most buildings. Table 7.14
lists the number of covered and uncovered bike racks as of 2003. Figure 7.4 shows the location
of the racks. Between 1993 and 2002, approximately 850 new bike racks were added. Of these,
approximately 750 were covered. Overall, approximately 20 percent of all bike racks are
covered.
OSU’s Bicycle Advisory Committee promotes bicycle travel and improvements to bicycle
facilities. Through the committee’s efforts, bike racks were added over the last decade to address
deficiencies and to comply with zoning regulations. Additional covered and uncovered racks will
continue to be added in response to identified needs and/or to ensure compliance with zoning
regulations when new facilities are constructed.
Table 7.14: Covered and Uncovered Bike Parking, 2003
Covered
Uncovered
Total
Campus Master Plan
Hoop
249
1,044
1,293
Wheel
869
2,989
3,858
Other
630
66
696
7-17
Parking Plan
Figure 7.4: Existing Bicycle Parking Facilities
7-18
Campus Master Plan
Parking Plan
7.11 Bicycle Action Plan
All new construction projects shall provide bike racks as part of the project. The number of bike
racks shall be provided consistent with the Corvallis Land Development Code, and at least half
of the required bike racks shall be covered. Where the opportunity exists, other facilities that
assist bicyclists shall also be provided, including showers, lockers, changing rooms, and indoor
bike storage areas. Bike racks shall continue to be provided in areas that are identified as
deficient.
Campus Master Plan
7-19
CAMPUS MASTER PLAN
2004-2015
Chapter 8 – Implementation of the CMP
OSU District
Implementation of the CMP
8.0 Implementation of the CMP
This chapter has been proposed by Oregon State University and contains code language to
implement the Oregon State University Campus Master Plan (CMP) by the City of Corvallis
through its land development regulatory authority. This language would replace the existing
OSU District language.
Figure 8.1: Aerial View of OSU with OSU District Boundary
Upon its adoption, this revised OSU District will be a part of the Corvallis Land Development
Code (LDC). Subsequent modifications to the CMP and/or to the OSU District shall be reviewed
in accordance with the provisions in the LDC.
Campus Master Plan
8-1
Implementation of the CMP
CHAPTER 3.36
OSU (OREGON STATE UNIVERSITY) DISTRICT
This district implements Comprehensive Plan policies that encourage coordination between the
University and City in planning and review of campus development. Coordination with campus
development is essential due to the physical size of the University and its related effects on City
facilities and services. This district also coincides with the Public Institutional Comprehensive
Plan designation for property generally within the OSU campus area. However, not all property
within this district is owned by OSU; some parcels are privately owned.
In conjunction with this district, a Physical Development Plan for campus development was
originally adopted in 1986 and has been revised periodically by the University. The most recent
revision, which this district implements, is the Oregon State University Campus Master Plan
(CMP), approved in 2004.
Section 3.36.10 – PURPOSE
The OSU District implements the provisions in OSU’s 2004-2015 Campus Master Plan, which is
the blueprint for campus development over the next decade.
The purpose of the OSU District is to:
a.
Encourage coordination between the University and the City of Corvallis, especially in
the areas of land use planning and reviewing campus development;
b.
Facilitate University development;
c.
Ensure compatibility of University development with surrounding areas;
d.
Ensure adequacy of public utilities, parking, and transportation facilities;
e.
Expedite the development review process; and
f.
Create a mechanism to regulate development on campus consistent with the CMP.
8-2
Campus Master Plan
Implementation of the CMP
Section 3.36.20 – PERMITTED USES
3.36.20.01 – General Development for University-owned Properties
a.
1.
Primary Uses Permitted Outright
(a) Residential Use Types:
Family
Group Residential
Group Residential/Group Care
Residential Care Facilities
(b) Residential Building Types:
Single Detached
Single Detached (Zero Lot Line)
Duplex
Single Attached (Zero Lot Line, 2 Units)
Attached (Townhouse)
Multi-Dwelling
2.
Civic Use Types:
Administrative Services
Community Recreation
Cultural Exhibits and Library Services
Lodge, Fraternal, and Civic Assembly
Parking Services
Public Safety Services
Religious Assembly
University Services and Facilities
Commercial uses to include, but not be limited to: communication
services, professional/administrative services, research services,
eating and drinking establishments, transient habitation, university
retail sales, spectator sports and entertainment, and participant
sports and recreation;
Industrial uses to include, but not be limited to: technological
production, limited manufacturing, and other industrial uses
customarily associated with research services.
Freestanding Wireless Telecommunications Facilities up to 60 ft. in
height, subject to the standards in Chapter 4.9
3.
Agriculture
Campus Master Plan
8-3
Implementation of the CMP
b. Accessory Uses Permitted Outright for University-owned Properties
c.
1.
Essential Services
2.
Family Day Care, as defined in Chapter 1.6
3.
Home Business, as defined in Chapter 1.6
4.
Major Services and Utilities
5.
Minor Utilities, subject to standards in Chapter 4.9
6.
Other development customarily incidental to the primary use in accordance with
Chapter 4.3- Accessory Development Regulations
7.
Collocated/attached wireless telecommunication facilities on multi-family (3 or
more stories) residential structures that do not increase the height of the existing
structures by more than 25 ft for whip antennas, including mounting, or by 10 ft
for all other antennas, subject to the standards in Chapter 4.9
8.
Collocated/attached wireless telecommunication facilities on nonresidential
structures that do not increase the height of the existing structures by more than
25 ft for whip antennas, including mounting, or by 10 ft for all other antennas,
subject to the standards in Chapter 4.9.
Privately Owned Parcels within the OSU District
1.
Seven privately owned parcels developed as single- and multi-family residential
uses are within the OSU District. These parcels are listed in Table 3.36-1.
Parcel
12503AA06500
12503AA06400
12503AA50800
12503AA06300
12503AC00100
11535CC01100
115340000200
8-4
Table 3.36-1: Privately Owned Parcels
Street Address
Sector
Current Use
633 SW 17th Street
G
Multi-Family Residential
645 SW 17th Street
G
Multi-Family Residential
1563 SW ‘A’ Street
G
Single-Family
Residential.
636 SW 16th Street
G
Single-Family Residential
1820 Stadium Ave.
G
Single-Family Residential
136 SW 9th Street
D
Multi-Family Residential
200-510 SW 35th Street
A
N/A
Campus Master Plan
Implementation of the CMP
2.
The parcels in Table 3.36-1 may be developed as:
a)
Uses consistent with “University Services and Facilities” in
accordance with Section 3.0.30.02.l; or
b)
Residential uses in accordance Section 3.36.60, below.
3.36.20.02 – Conditional Development - The following Uses are subject to review in
accordance with Chapter 2.3, the provisions of this Chapter, and all other applicable provisions
of this Code.
a.
Uses that require a State or Federal air quality discharge permit (except for parking);
b.
Freestanding wireless telecommunications facilities greater than 60 feet in height, subject
to the standards in Chapter 4.9;
c.
Freestanding wireless telecommunications facilities that do not meet the setback or
spacing standard requirements of sections 4.9.60.02.b and 4.9.60.02.c, subject to the
standards in Chapter 4.9; or
d.
Collocated/attached wireless telecommunication facilities on multi-family (3 or more
stories) residential structures that increase the height of the existing structures by more
than 25 ft for whip antennas, including mounting, or by more than 10 ft for all other
antennas, subject to the standards in Chapter 4.9.
e.
Co-located/attached wireless telecommunications facilities on nonresidential structures
that increase the height of existing structures by more than 25 feet, including mounting,
or by more than 10 ft for all other antennas, subject to the standards in Chapter 4.9.
Section 3.36.30 – PROCEDURES AND DETERMINATION OF COMPLIANCE
Section 3.36.30.01 - Overview
Development within the OSU District area shall be reviewed for compliance with the standards
in this Code and the Campus Master Plan Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP), except as
expressly modified by provisions of this Chapter. Development proposals found to be compliant
with these provisions, and which do not require a public hearing through the Conditional
Development process, may be approved through the standard building permit process. Proposals
found not to be compliant may be reviewed in accordance with the appropriate adjustment
procedures described in Section 3.36.30.02. Development proposals identified in Section
3.36.20.02 may also be approved through the Conditional Development process identified in
Chapter 2.3.
Campus Master Plan
8-5
Implementation of the CMP
Section 3.36.30.02 – Adjustments
Development not consistent with the standards contained in this Chapter shall be reviewed as one
of the following:
a.
A Minor Adjustment, as described in Section 3.36.30.03. Minor Adjustments, shall be
reviewed under the City’s Plan Compatibility Review process and criteria (Chapter 2.13);
or
b.
A Major Adjustment, as described in Section 3.36.30.04. Major adjustments, shall be
reviewed as follows:
1.
All proposals that meet or exceed the thresholds identified in Section 3.36.30.04,
subsections “a” through “n” shall be reviewed under the Planned Development
review process and criteria for major modifications (Section 2.5.50.06).
2.
In addition to the process required in subsection “1," above, proposals that meet
or exceed the thresholds identified in Section 3.36.30.04 , subsections “d” through
“k” shall be reviewed as Land Development Code Text Amendments consistent
with the process and criteria in Chapter 1.2.
3.
In addition to the processes required in subsections “1" and “2," above, proposals
that meet or exceed the threshold identified in Section 3.36.30.04, subsection “h”
shall be reviewed as a District Change, consistent with process and criteria in
Chapter 2.2, and if needed, as a Comprehensive Plan Amendment, consistent with
the process and criteria in Chapter 2.1.
Section 3.36.30.03 – Minor Adjustment
A Minor Adjustment shall be triggered if a proposal meets the following criteria:
a.
Deviates from one of the dimensional standards, but not more than three of the
dimensional standards, in Section 3.36.50, by 10 percent or less.
Section 3.36.30.04 – Major Adjustments
A Major Adjustment shall be triggered if a proposal meets one or more of the following criteria:
a.
Modifies more than three of the dimensional standards in Section 3.36.50;
b.
Modifies any of the dimensional standards in Section 3.36.50 by more than 10 percent;
c
Proposes a stand-alone parking lot or structure in a location not identified in Figure 7.3
(Future Parking Facilities) of the CMP;
8-6
Campus Master Plan
Implementation of the CMP
d.
Exceeds 90 percent parking usage campus wide and does not provide additional parking
facilities as part of the project;
e.
Proposes development with a gross square footage that is within the campus total
development allocation but exceeds the maximum sector allocation;
f.
Proposes development such that the amount of retained open space is consistent with the
campus minimum open space requirement but falls short of the minimum requirement for
the sector (requires a commensurate increase in open space allocation in another sector);
g.
Is not consistent with the Transportation Improvement Plan in Chapter 6 of the CMP;
h.
Adds new land area to or subtracts land area from the CMP;
i.
Creates new CMP policies;
j.
Results in a change in sector boundary or redistribution of development allocation
between sectors;
k.
Results in the cessation of intra-campus transit services (e.g., shuttle, bus, etc.);
l.
Proposes a change in use for any of the parcels associated with the College Inn and its
parking;
m.
Proposes development in Sector J for building floor area in excess of 254,100 sq. ft.; or
n.
Proposes a new building within the 100-foot transition area on the northern boundary of
Sector A, B, and/or C from the western boundary of Sector A to 26th Street. In order to
create a “graceful edge” between the campus and northwest neighborhoods, any proposed
building subject to LDC 3.36.30.04(n) shall be subject to the following criteria:
1.
2.
3.
Campus Master Plan
Maximum building height shall be 35 feet provided the following is
satisfied: Shadows from the new buildings shall not shade more than the
lower 4 feet of a south wall of an existing structure on adjacent property
between 10 a.m. and 2 p.m. on March 21;
Structures shall not have a continuous horizontal distance exceeding 60
feet along the boundary;
Along the vertical face of a structure, offsets shall occur at a minimum of
every 20 feet by providing any two of the following:
a)
Recesses of a minimum depth of 8 feet;
b)
Extensions a minimum depth of 8 feet, a maximum length
of an overhang shall be 25 feet;
c)
Offsets or breaks in roof elevations of 3 or more feet in
height;
8-7
Implementation of the CMP
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
Building materials shall be consistent with the OSU standards for such
materials, and shall also be compatible with adjacent residential houses
and structures;
New development shall be designed to minimize negative visual impacts
affecting the character of the adjacent neighborhood by considering the
scale, bulk and character of the nearby structures in relation to the
proposed building or structure;
Roofs shall be gabled or hip type roofs (minimum pitch 3 to 1) with at
least a 30-inch overhang and using shingles or similar roof materials;
A vegetative buffer shall be installed in a manner consistent with Section
3.36.50.06(c);
Outdoor building components such as transformers and other types of
mechanical equipment that produce noise shall not be permitted within the
required setback;
Buildings proposed for the transition area described within this section
that are in an area adjacent to the College Hill West Historic District shall
have an advisory review completed by the City’s Historic Preservation
Advisory Board (HPAB), or its successor. The HPAB shall provide
comment and recommendations to the Planning Commission for
consideration;
Trash dumpsters, gas meters, and other utilities and or mechanical
equipment serving a building or structure shall be screened in accordance
with Section 3.36.50.14
Section 3.36.30.05 – Campus Master Plan Update
The CMP covers a 10- to 12-year planning period. However, if conditions change significantly
or other unanticipated events occur, it may be necessary to update the CMP before the end of the
planning period. An update of the CMP shall be reviewed as described in Section 3.36.30.02.b 1
through Sections 3.36.30.02.b 3. The review shall comprehensively evaluate the need to update
or otherwise modify the Campus Master Plan, its policies and related traffic and parking studies,
and this Chapter.
A CMP update will be required under the following conditions:
a.
A development proposal, when considered in combination with constructed
improvements or improvements with approved building permits, will exceed the total
development allocation for the campus (for all sectors);
b.
New CMP policies are created that alter existing policy direction or require existing
policies to be modified;
c.
The parking plan has been implemented, and campus-wide parking occupancy is greater
than 90 percent; and/or
8-8
Campus Master Plan
Implementation of the CMP
d.
The CMP planning period has expired.
Section 3.36.40 – DEVELOPMENT SECTORS
The CMP divides the campus into nine development areas (see Figure 3.36-1) identified as
sectors “A” through “J” (there is no Sector “I”). Each sector has a development allocation, which
is the gross square footage allowed for new construction. Each sector also has a minimum open
space requirement that identifies the amount of area that must remain in green space or as a
pedestrian amenity. These standards will guide the form of future development.
Figure 8.2: Campus Sector Map
Campus Master Plan
8-9
Implementation of the CMP
Section 3.36.40.01 – Sector Development Allocation
a.
Sector development allocation represents the gross square footage of new development
allowed in each sector, regardless of the type of use (see Table 3.36-2).
b.
Each new development project in a sector shall reduce that sector’s available allocation.
c.
Existing and approved development as of December 31, 2003 has been included in the
existing/approved development calculations and shall not reduce the sector development
allocation.
d.
Demolition of existing square footage and/or restoration of non-open-space areas to open
space shall count as an equivalent square footage credit to the sector development or open
space allocation.
e.
Square footage associated with a parking structure shall be included in the development
allocation for the sector in which the structure is located. Square footage associated with
at-grade parking lots shall be calculated as impervious surface but not count as part of
development allocation.
Table 3.36-2: Building Square Footage by Sector
Sector
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
J
Total
Existing/Approval
287,272
777,778
4,654,719
325,331
256,918
463,088
746,023
126,921
37,463
7,675,513
Maximum Future
Allocation
250,000
500,000
750,000
35,000
120,000
750,000
350,000
50,000
350,000
3,155,000
Total
537,272
1,277,778
5,404,719
360,331
376,918
1,213,088
1,096,023
176,921
387,463
10,830,513
Section 3.36.40.02 – Sector Minimum Open Space
a.
Open space is defined as landscape areas, pedestrian amenities (e.g., plazas, quads,
sidewalks, courtyards), parks, recreation fields, agricultural fields, and other nondeveloped areas.
b.
Impervious surface areas that are not classified as open space (Section 3.36.40.02.a) shall
count against the sector’s open space allocation.
8-10
Campus Master Plan
Implementation of the CMP
c.
The existing Memorial Union quad, library quad, a relocated Peoples’ Park, and the
lower campus area (the area between 11th Street and 14th Street, south of Monroe and
north of Jefferson Street) shall be retained for open space. Incidental development (e.g.,
clock towers, park benches, information kiosks, artistic works, sculptures, etc.) is
permitted.
Table 3.36-3: Minimum Future Open Space by Sector
Sector
Minimum Future Open Space
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
J
Campus-Wide Minimum
78%
33%
36%
61%
77%
20%
40%
64%
79%
50%
Section 3.36.40.03 – Sector Development Allocation and Open Space Tabulation
With each development application, the University shall provide the City with the following:
a.
Updated tabulations of remaining available development allocations and open space areas
and percentages for each sector.
b.
When a project’s land use allocation in a sector is inconsistent with that previously
forecast in the BTM, a project report that includes the following components;
1.
Comparison of a project's development generated trips to the trips forecast
in the previously revised BTM;
2.
Traffic impacts resulting from a shift to a more intensive land use;
3.
Proposal of recommended mitigation strategies if a project results in a
failing intersection level of service grade of "E" or "F";
Campus Master Plan
8-11
Implementation of the CMP
Figure 8.3: Neighborhood Transition Area
8-12
Campus Master Plan
Implementation of the CMP
Section 3.36.50 – DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
Section 3.36.50.01 – Maximum Building Height
a.
The maximum building height for new buildings shall vary by sector and by proximity to
a district boundary in accordance with the provisions in Table 3.36-4.
b.
A Primary Neighborhood Transition Area is the area within either 50 feet or 100 feet of
the OSU District boundary. In Sectors B and C, a Secondary Neighborhood Transition
Area shall extend for another 300 feet in some locations. Transition area locations are
identified on Figure 3.36-2. Development within a Primary or Secondary Neighborhood
Transition Area shall be consistent with the maximum building height for the transition
area, as noted in Table 3.36-4.
c.
In situations where a building footprint straddles the neighborhood transition area
boundary, each portion of the building shall not exceed the maximum building height for
the corresponding area.
d.
Building projections (such as chimneys, spires, domes, towers, and flagpoles) not used
for human occupancy shall not exceed one and one-half (1.5) times the maximum
building height of the sector.
Campus Master Plan
8-13
Implementation of the CMP
Table 3.36-4: Building Height by Sector
Building Heights
Sector
Sector Interior
50-ft. Wide
Primary Transition
100-ft. Wide
Primary Transition
Secondary
Transition Area
A
50 ft.
NA
35 ft.
NA
B
75 ft.
NA
35 ft.
60 ft.
C
112 ft.
NA
35 ft.
50 ft.1
55 ft.2
60 ft.
D
75 ft.
NA
35 ft.
NA
E
50 ft.
NA
35 ft.
NA
F
150 ft.
NA
35 ft.
75 ft.3
NA
G
75 ft.
75 ft.
NA
NA
H
75 ft.
50 ft.
NA
NA
J
75 ft.
NA
35 ft.
NA
Section 3.36.50.02 – Roof-Mounted Equipment
a.
No roof-mounted mechanical equipment shall be visible from the entrance of buildings
that abut the development site.
b.
Satellite dishes, antennas, co-located/attached wireless telecommunications facilities, and
other telecommunications equipment shall not be visible from nearby streets or buildings
and must be screened behind a parapet wall or architectural feature.
Section 3.36.50.03 – Minimum Building Setbacks
a.
Structures within 100 feet of the OSU District boundary shall have a minimum setback of
20 feet from the boundary line, except when abutting a street (see sections 3.36.50.03.b
and 3.36.50.03.c, below).
1
The 50-ft. height allowance only applies to the section of the Transition Area for Sector C that is from the east of
26th Street to 15th Street.
2
The height of structures on the entire College Inn site, including associated parking areas, is limited to 55 feet.
3
The 75-ft. height allowance applies only to the section of transition area for sector “F” that is east of Grove Street
and abuts Western Boulevard.
8-14
Campus Master Plan
Implementation of the CMP
b.
For structures abutting a public street, the minimum setback shall be 10 feet from the
edge of the right-of-way, assuming the public street is constructed to City standards
(including landscape strip and sidewalk). If standard street improvements do not exist,
standard street improvements shall be constructed in accordance with Section 3.36.50.09.
c.
For structures abutting a private street, the minimum setback shall be 20 feet from the
edge of the curb or 10 feet from the edge of the sidewalk.
d.
Structures shall have a minimum setback of 10 feet from the edge of a pedestrian access
way.
Section 3.36.50.04 – Building Entrances
a.
Buildings designed for human occupancy with facades facing a public or private street
shall have a main building entrance facing the street (not just an emergency exit).
b.
Buildings designed for human occupancy shall include a pedestrian amenity, such as a
porch, plaza, quad, courtyard, covered entryway, or seating area (100 sq. ft., minimum),
as a component of a main building entrance.
c.
Buildings used exclusively for agricultural purposes (sheds, barns, garages), research, or
for storage shall be exempt from these standards for building entrances as described in
“a” and “b,” above.
Section 3.36.50.05 – Ground Floor Windows
a.
Buildings designed for human occupancy with facade(s) that face a public or private
street, multi-use path, and/or sidewalk shall have windows, pedestrian entrances, or
display windows that cover at least 25 percent of the length and 15 percent of the surface
area of the ground floor facade.
b.
“Ground floor” is defined as the finished floor elevation of the first floor that qualifies as
a story in a building , as defined in the State of Oregon Structural Spatiality Code.
c.
Mirrored glass may not be used in ground floor windows.
d.
Parking structures (either above or below ground) shall be exempt from these standards
for ground floor windows.
e.
Buildings or portions of buildings used exclusively for research or storage purposes shall
be exempt from the standards for ground floor windows described in “a” through “c,”
above. Buildings that do not meet the standards for ground floor windows shall not be
located within a Primary Neighborhood Transition Area or within 50 feet of Monroe
Avenue.
Campus Master Plan
8-15
Implementation of the CMP
Section 3.36.50.06 – Landscaping
a.
Landscaping shall be provided in accordance with Chapter 4.2, and shall be provided for
parking areas adjacent to public and private streets in accordance with Chapter 4.1.
b.
In lieu of a landscape installation and/or landscape maintenance bond or other financial
assurance for landscape and irrigation installation required by Section 4.2.20.a, a letter of
commitment from the OSU Operations and Maintenance Department shall be provided.
The letter of commitment shall include the following:
1.
A copy of the approved landscaping and irrigation plan;
2.
A commitment that the landscaping and irrigation will be installed prior to
issuance of a final occupancy permit; and
3.
A commitment that the landscaping and irrigation will achieve 90 percent
coverage within three years and be maintained by the OSU Operations and
Maintenance Department.
c. A vegetative buffer with a minimum width of 20 feet that consists of a mix of evergreen
and deciduous trees and shrubs shall be established between the OSU property line and
any proposed, building, access drive and/ or parking lot within the transition area along
the northern boundary of Sector A, B and C from the western boundary of Sector A to
26th Street and for the College Inn site. This vegetative buffer will be required upon any
redevelopment of existing parking lots and/or the razing and redevelopment of existing
buildings.
Section 3.36.50.07 – Drainageway Management Agreement
a.
In lieu of drainageway dedications and/or easements for new development, expansion or
redevelopment on parcels adjoining an open natural drainageway as per Section 4.5.80,
OSU shall provide a Drainageway Management Agreement (DMA) that meets the
purposes cited in Section 4.5.10 and the policies of the City of Corvallis Stormwater
Master Plan.
b.
Drainageway widths and areas subject to the DMA shall be defined per Section 4.5.80.d.
c.
The DMA shall include but not be limited to the following objectives;
1.
8-16
Establish that the DMA is between Oregon State University (OSU) and
the City of Corvallis (CITY) to establish CITY maintenance access rights
and to limit OSU development activities within the particular
drainageway.
Campus Master Plan
Implementation of the CMP
2.
Protect the hydrological and biological functions of open drainageways
including: managing storm water drainage; improving water quality; and
protecting riparian plant and animal habitats;
3.
Include a map(s) that defines the maintenance area (AREA) boundary
line(s);
4.
Grant to the CITY the right , on, under, and across said AREA, to
construct, maintain, replace, reconstruct, and/or remove a drainageway
with all appurtenances incident thereto or necessary therewith, to facilitate
(work toward) properly functioning condition . Grant to the CITY the
right , on, under, and across said AREA to cut and remove any trees and
other obstructions which may endanger the safety or interfere with the
construction, use, or maintenance of said drainageway. Grant to the
CITY the right of ingress and egress to, over, and from the above
described AREA at any and all times for the purpose of doing anything
necessary, useful, or convenient for the operation of a stormwater utility.
CITY shall provide notification to OSU and receive OSU’s written
authorization prior to accessing the utility. CITY shall provide
notification to OSU and receive OSU’s written authorization prior to
implementing related work. Prior written approval will not be required
during times of emergency;
5.
Require the CITY upon each and every occasion that such drainageway is
constructed, maintained, replaced, reconstructed or removed, to restore the
premises of OSU, and any buildings or improvements disturbed by the
CITY, to a condition as near as practicable to the condition they were in
prior to any such installation or work. If such restoration is not
practicable, then the CITY shall pay to OSU an agreed upon compensation
for such conditions that cannot be reasonably or practicably restored;
6.
Require OSU and the CITY to limit use of the AREA to purposes
consistent with the construction, use and maintenance of said
drainageway. Such uses typically include natural landscaping and
stormwater management facilities as approved by the CITY. OSU
reserves the right to utilize the AREA for education purposes, provided the
activities do not affect the terms of this agreement. No new building or
other permanent structure, dumping, regrading, paving, decrease in
vegetative cover, or other action which would enjoin the CITY from the
intended purpose of this Agreement shall be placed or occur within the
AREA without the written permission of the CITY. Actions specified
within the plan are exempt from this obligation; and
Campus Master Plan
8-17
Implementation of the CMP
7.
With each request to enter into a DMA, OSU shall produce a Properly
Functioning Condition (PFC) report. The PFC report shall be
developed/compiled by a qualified professional and shall include;
a)
A stream health assessment of Oak Creek for the AREA impacted
by development. As part of this assessment, an evaluation shall be
done for any areas needing improvement due to site-specific
impairments that have affected the PFC of Oak Creek.
b)
A list of recommended actions and improvements, which consider
the findings and recommendations from the OSU’s Oak Creek
Task Force report, to re-establish the PFC of Oak Creek.
c)
An implementation plan for the recommended actions determined
in the PFC report.
Section 3.36.50.08 – Parking Improvements
a.
Parking areas shall be designed to promote safe and convenient pedestrian access.
b.
Parking improvements may be constructed as stand-alone projects and/or concurrent with
new development.
c.
Parking improvements constructed as stand-alone projects shall be located in accordance
with the sites identified in Figure 7.3 (Future Parking Facilities) of the CMP.
d.
When usage of campus-wide parking facilities exceeds 90 percent based on the most
recent parking usage inventory, any development that increases building square footage
shall be subject to the provisions of Section 3.36.30.02.
e.
New development in sectors A through H may construct additional parking facilities in
any of the sectors A through H, provided the OSU campus shuttle is operational.
f.
If the OSU campus shuttle ceases to operate, new development shall be subject to the
provisions of Section 3.36.30.02.
g.
Development in Sector J (South Farm) shall include construction of parking
improvements in Sector J.
h.
Existing parking improvements for the College Inn site shall be reserved for the use of
the occupants of and visitors to that structure. As uses change and/or additional
development occurs on the site, bicycle parking necessary to achieve the 10 percent
reduction allowed in Section 4.1.20.p of this Code shall be provided.
8-18
Campus Master Plan
Implementation of the CMP
I.
Vehicle parking shall be located to the rear of buildings, and where it does not disrupt
the pedestrian streetscape, may be located to the side of buildings.
Section 3.36.50.09– Transportation Improvements
a.
Safe and convenient transportation improvements shall be provided in conjunction with
new development. For the purposes of this section, “safe and convenient” means
providing City-standard improvements consistent with functions identified with the
street’s functional classification. This includes street, pedestrian, landscape strips, and in
some cases, bicycle improvements. All transportation improvements shall be constructed
in accordance with the CMP Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) and the City’s
Standard Construction Specifications. If there is any conflict between the CMP and City
Standard Construction Specifications, the latter shall prevail.
b.
An application that includes the installation of public or private street improvements shall
be reviewed and processed in accordance with Section 4.0.70 - Street Requirements.
Additionally, construction of a portion of a sector’s available square footage of
development allocation shall trigger the implementation of transportation improvements
identified in the CMP TIP.
c
Where transportation improvements are required either by this code or the CMP’s TIP,
but cannot feasibly be implemented (as defined below), a Memorandum of Agreement
(MOA), when justified (as defined below), may be executed to specify the manner that
improvements shall be provided.
1.
A MOA is justified when implementation of the CMP TIP is demonstrated
to be infeasible. Examples of justification include situations where
insufficient ROW exists to construct standard improvements (i.e.
Washington Way), where there are conflicts with natural features, or
where there are physical or other constraints (i.e. topography, existing
buildings).
2.
When an MOA is justified, it shall include but not be limited to the
following objectives;
a)
Definition of the Terms of the Agreement;
1)
2)
3)
b)
Campus Master Plan
A listing of the parties included in the Agreement;
A listing of improvements to be included in the Agreement
and what project the improvements are associated with; and
A time frame that the Agreement terms operate under.
Justification for deviation from the standard shall include but not
be limited to the following;
8-19
Implementation of the CMP
3.
1)
Identification of any deviation(s) from the standard;
2)
Citation of the reasons the standard improvement cannot
feasibly be implemented; and
3)
Identification of the revised design standards that will be
incorporated into the design.
The final MOA shall be approved by the City Engineer at his/her
discretion and signed by OSU and the City Manager.
d.
Pedestrian amenities (lighting, sidewalk, bench placement, planters, courtyards, quads,
transit stops/shelters, bicycle racks, recycling receptacles, etc.) shall be considered part
of typical street improvements and incorporated into the final design.
e.
Transportation improvements shall be constructed to ensure ADA compliance.
f.
Speed tables, street lighting, crosswalk marking, and similar safety and speed control
improvements are components of typical street design and shall be considered in the final
design or required when mandated by engineering design standards such as the Manual
on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD).
g.
Copies of complete “as builts” shall be certified by the design engineer and shall be
submitted to the City for approval for all newly constructed public improvements.
Section 3.36.50.10 – Pedestrian and Bicycle System Connections
a.
Clearly defined and direct pedestrian connections shall be provided between street and
building entrances and between parking areas and building entrances.
b.
All pedestrian connections shall be a minimum of 5 feet in width of unobstructed passage
and must be hard surfaced using pavers, brick, asphalt, or concrete.
c.
Sidewalks shall be provided along all streets and shall be required as an improvement
when development and/or redevelopment occurs.
d.
An application that includes the installation of pedestrian improvements shall be
reviewed and processed in accordance with Section 4.0.40 - Pedestrian Requirements.
Additionally, construction of any of a sector’s available development allocation for new
development shall trigger the implementation of bicycle and pedestrian improvements
identified in the CMP TIP.
e.
Where pedestrian improvements are needed in excess of a development’s frontage, as
identified in the CMP’s Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) and cannot feasibly be
8-20
Campus Master Plan
Implementation of the CMP
implemented, a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) with the City in accordance with
Section 3.36.50.09, when justified, may be executed to specify the manner in which
improvements shall be provided.
f.
Bicycle and pedestrian improvements shall be constructed to ensure ADA compliance.
Section 3.36.50.11 – Site Furnishings
Site furnishings shall not block or impede pedestrian circulation or reduce the required sidewalk
width.
Section 3.36.50.12 – Transit/Shuttle Stops
a.
A transit stop and/or transit shelter shall be provided as required by the Corvallis Transit
System.
b.
A shuttle stop shall be provided as required by OSU Parking Services.
c.
An application that includes the installation of transit improvements shall be reviewed
and processed in accordance with Section 4.0.60 - Transit Requirements.
d.
Corvallis Transit System (CTS) transit stops and OSU shuttle stops are considered part of
an effective transit/shuttle system and shall be incorporated into the transportation
system. Transit/Shuttle stops and shelters shall be constructed to ensure ADA
compliance.
Section 3.36.50.13 – Bicycle Parking
a.
Bicycle parking shall be constructed with each development based on the assignable
square footage (i.e., office, classroom, research facility, etc.) of a proposed development
according to the parking standards in Section 4.1.30.
b.
Bicycle parking shall be near, but shall not block or impede building entrances.
c.
At least 50 percent of the required bicycle parking shall be covered.
d.
All bicycle parking shall comply with the standards of Section 4.1.70.
Section 3.36.50.14 – Mechanical Equipment and Trash Enclosures, and Outdoor Storage
Areas
a.
All mechanical equipment enclosures for non-agricultural buildings shall be screened as
part of the building construction or with landscaping, masonry walls, solid wood fencing,
Campus Master Plan
8-21
Implementation of the CMP
or a combination of these materials for those areas that are visible from a street, building,
or pedestrian access way, or are adjacent to a neighborhood.
b
Trash collection enclosures for all buildings shall be screened as part of the building
construction or with landscaping, masonry walls, solid wood fencing, or a combination of
these materials for those areas that are visible from a street, building, pedestrian access
way, or are adjacent to a neighborhood.
c.
All outdoor storage areas shall be screened with construction similar to the adjacent
building or with landscaping, masonry walls, solid wood fencing, or a combination of
these materials for those areas that are visible from a street, adjacent building, pedestrian
access way, or are adjacent to a neighborhood.
Section 3.36.50.15 – Public, Private, and Franchise Utilities
a.
All new utility distribution lines shall be underground.
b.
Development requiring the installation of public utility improvements shall be reviewed
and processed in accordance with Section 4.0.80 - Public Utility Extensions, and Section
4.0.90 - Public Improvement Procedures.
c.
Development within the City’s combination sewer systems shall comply with the
separation of storm drain from sanitary sewer system policy criteria in accordance with
the City’s Community Development Policy 1003.
d.
Development occurring on a parcel fronting or adjacent to a drainageway identified in the
City of Corvallis Stormwater Master Plan , shall be constructed in accordance with
Section 3.36.50.07, and Chapter 4.5 of this Code and shall comply with the watershed
management guidelines and policies identified in Chapter 5 of the City’s Stormwater
Master Plan.
e.
Transformers and vaults not underground shall be screened consistent with Chapter 4.2.
f.
An application that includes the installation of franchise utilities shall be reviewed and
processed in accordance with Section 4.0.100 - Franchise Utility Installations.
g.
Copies of complete “as builts” shall be certified by the design engineer and shall be
submitted to the City for approval for all new constructed public improvements.
Section 3.36.50.16 – Exterior Lighting
a.
8-22
OSU “historic style” light fixtures with shielded luminaires that minimize uplighting and
glare shall be used along pedestrian accessways.
Campus Master Plan
Implementation of the CMP
b.
The historic style light fixtures shall have poles and bases, and associated pole mounted
equipment (e.g. banner hangers, etc.) finished with a neutral gray or black or other dark
color.
c.
Contemporary light fixtures with shielded luminaires that minimize uplighting and glare
shall be used in parking areas or other areas outside of the historic campus core and shall
meet the requirements of a full cut-off light fixture.
d.
Outdoor field lighting may be installed on intramural and recreational playing fields,
provided that the light is directed on the fields and not directed toward adjacent privately
owned properties. Adjacent to residential areas, a lighting curfew of 10 p.m. shall be
imposed on these playing fields so that all events are completed prior to that time.
e.
With the exception of lighting for intercollegiate athletic facilities and intramural and
recreational playing fields, light trespass onto surrounding residential properties shall not
exceed 0.1 footcandles, except in areas where additional lighting for safety and security,
as determined by the university, is necessary. In such cases, light trespass onto
surrounding residential properties shall not exceed 0.25 footcandles. Testing of the
lighting by the University to ensure compliance shall be done after the lights have
experienced 10 hours of illuminance, or burn time.
f.
Stadium lighting for future expansions to Reser Stadium shall be provided in a manner
that does not increase light spillage outside of the stadium proper.
g.
Installation of field lighting for intercollegiate athletic facilities other than Reser Stadium
shall ensure that light trespass onto surrounding residential properties does not exceed 0.5
footcandles. Testing of the lighting by the University to ensure compliance shall be
done after the lights have experienced 10 hours of illuminance, or burn time.
Section 3.36.50.17 – Accessibility
a.
All buildings and other structures used for human occupancy shall meet or exceed
accessibility standards as established by the Americans with Disabilities Act.
b.
Parking facilities for the disabled shall be provided near building entrances.
Section 3.36.60 – Development Standards for Non-University-Owned Properties
Development or redevelopment of properties in this district that are not owned by Oregon State
University (identified in Section 3.36.20.01.c), shall be reviewed based on the standards in Table
3.36-5.
Campus Master Plan
8-23
Implementation of the CMP
Table 3.36-5: Residential Use Zoning Standards
Current Use
Development Zoning Standards
Single-Family Residential
RS-5
Multi-Family Residential
RS-12(U)
3.36.70 - Campus Master Plan Monitoring
a.
As a means of monitoring the implementation of the Campus Master Plan, the University
shall provide the following information to the City on a yearly basis.
1.
Updated tabulations of development and open space for the planning area,
including:
2.
3.
8-24
a)
Gross square footage of development by type that occurred
in each sector over the previous 12 month period;
b)
Remaining available development allocation for each
sector; and
c)
Remaining open space areas and percentages for each
sector.
Updated parking utilization reports, including :
a)
Identification of new parking space creation and the total
number of spaces provided within the CMP boundary and a
breakdown by sector and lot type(student, staff, visitor,
free, etc.);
b)
Percentage of parking space utilization campus-wide; and
c)
Identification of available parking spaces (using City
standard parking configurations) and usage within each
residential parking district bordering OSU and of the
number of residential permits funded by the University. In
addition, provide details of other efforts undertaken by the
University to address neighborhood parking issues;
TDM Report that identifies efforts and the effectiveness of those efforts
undertaken by the University over the previous 12 months to reduce
reliance on the single-occupant vehicle. Such efforts shall include, but not
be limited to:
Campus Master Plan
Implementation of the CMP
4)
b.
a)
Shuttle routes and usage;
b)
Other efforts in support of transit, car-pool, or van-pool
usage;
c)
Tabulation of the number of single-occupancy vehicles
reduced;
d)
Location and number of bicycle parking spaces, including
the number of covered spaces and any additions to the
inventory; and
e)
Identification of campus pedestrian routes and system
improvements.
Base Transportation Model update that includes the following components
over the previous 12 month period:
a)
Traffic counts to be updated on a 5-year cycle;
b)
New development, and if known, future development
square footage and use type (based on the existing model’s
categories) to be included in the model assumptions on a
per sector basis ;
c)
New parking areas or roadways that may have an effect on
traffic volumes or patterns; and
d)
Within one year of adoption of the CMP, and on a recurrent
2-year schedule, OSU shall complete in coordination with
City Staff a baseline traffic count for Jackson Avenue
between Arnold Way and 35th Street. City staff shall
provide OSU and the neighborhood association with the
most recent baseline traffic volume measurements made
within the last five years.
Additional monitoring efforts include:
1.
Campus Master Plan
Within one year of adoption of the CMP, OSU should work with the City
to perform a baseline traffic count of local streets identified by
neighborhood associations as problems in the areas bordering Sectors A,
B, and C, and south of Harrison Boulevard;
8-25
Implementation of the CMP
2.
8-26
OSU shall participate as a full partner in a task force initiated by the City
with City, University, neighborhood association and neighborhood
business representation, to review and evaluate existing baseline traffic
measurements, parking studies, and other relevant information and
develop strategies to mitigate problem areas.
Campus Master Plan
CAMPUS MASTER PLAN
2004-2015
Appendix A – Sector Detail
Appendix A
Sector A–West 35th
Sector A: Area Summary
Primary Function
Sector Area
Sector Acreage
Existing/ Approved Development
Existing Impervious Surface
Existing OSU
Existing Non OSU
Total Existing Impervious Surface
Percent Impervious Surface
Future Development
Total Development
Minimum Open Space Required
Agriculture
Research
EPA
Housing
Parking
3,358,166 sf
77.09 acres
287,272 sf
436,130sf
130,157 sf
566,903 sf
16.8%
250,000 sf
537,272 sf
83%
sf = square feet
Sector A: Existing Building and Coverage Detail
BLDG NO.
0350
0358
0357
0347
0349
0354
0351
0353
0137
0379
0383
0384
0346
0378
0387
0380
IOTB-36
IOTB-33
BUILDING NAME
ANIMAL PHYSIOLOGY LAB
RABBIT RESEARCH LAB I
RABBIT RESEARCH LAB II
BEEF BARN
BEEF BARN 2
CHEMICAL STORAGE
FARM SERVICE
FARM SERVICE EQUIP STORAGE
HINSDALE WAVE RESEARCH LAB
LOCKSTAVE BUILDING (2)
PHYSICAL PLANT WHSE 1
PHYSICAL PLANT WHSE 2
SHEEP BARN
STOCKING JUDGING PAVILION
STORAGE SHED
WOOL LABORATORY
Campus Master Plan
BUILDING
FOOTPRINT SF
2,881
6,190
10,038
19,882
6,195
2,522
4,299
4,166
62,797
3,299
3,674
2,096
23,676
3,418
2,433
3,514
4,138
9,825
BUILDING SF
1,963
4,653
7,394
19,115
6,195
2,400
4,940
2,400
65,000
8,400
3,600
2,000
14,413
3,208
2,260
3,467
4,138
9,825
A-1
Appendix A
BLDG NO.
BUILDING NAME
IOTB-32
IOTB-294
IOTB-303
IOTB-298
IOTB-295
IOTB-296
IOTB-297
IOTB-136
IOTB-299
IOTB-291
IOTB-292
IOTB-306
IOTB-293
IOTB-133
IOTB-133
IOTB-135
NOSU-BLDG
NOSU-IOTB
TOTAL ALL BUILDINGS
A-2
BUILDING
FOOTPRINT SF
1,584
474
271
280
494
443
44
355
444
279
279
6,719
335
10,480
3,355
178
87,172
8,715
296,944
BUILDING SF
1,584
474
271
280
494
443
44
355
444
279
279
6,719
335
10,480
3,355
178
87,172
8,715
287,272
Campus Master Plan
Appendix A
Sector B – West Campus
Sector B: Area Summary
Primary Function
Sector Area
Sector Acreage
Existing/ Approved Development
Existing Impervious Surface
Existing OSU
Existing Non-OSU
Total Existing Impervious Surface
Percent Impervious Surface
Future Development
Total Development
Minimum Open Space Required
Research
Academic
Housing
Support Services
Parking
3,129,255 sf
71.84 acres
777,778 sf
1,170,531 sf
174,949 sf
1,345,480 sf
42.9%
500,000 sf
1,277,778 sf
25%
sf = square feet
Sector B: Existing Building and Coverage Detail
BLDG NO.
0259
0202
0164
0162
0160
0157
0080
0088
0098
0101
0124
0128
0139
0132
0135
0136
0141
0148
0149
BUILDING NAME
LAB ANIMAL RESOURCES CENTER
ORCHARD COURT APARTMENTS
BROODER HOUSE F
VET DAIRY BARN
MANURE SHED
POULTRY HOUSE H
CROP SCIENCE BLDG
CLARK LABORATORY
RADIATION CENTER
SEED LAB
PEAVY HALL
WIEGAND HALL
WEST GREENHOUSE
WEST GREENHOUSE (W8&9)
TRANSPORTATION SERVICES
MOTOR POOL ANNEX
ENVIRONMTL HEALTH & SAFETY ANNEX
RICHARDSON HALL
POULTRY HOUSE G
Campus Master Plan
BUILDING
FOOTPRINT SF
11,276
75,385
8,131
6,295
3,242
6,184
15,436
8,433
43,998
8,000
35,817
37,997
81,898
11,307
8,764
7,498
6,160
38,468
8,204
BUILDING SF
9,976
79,302
7,165
10,350
618
5,676
58,116
7,989
47,689
10,595
84,020
57,957
13,893
16,456
8,188
7,693
5,686
97,000
7,040
A-3
Appendix A
BLDG NO. BUILDING NAME
0151
DRYDEN HALL
0154
VET MED RESEARCH LAB
IOTB-81
IOTB-231
IOTB-232
IOTB-30
IOTB-138
IOTB-141
IOTB-140
IOTB-77
IOTB-76
IOTB-235
IOTB-275
IOTB-276
IOTB-277
IOTB-266
IOTB-271
NOSU BLDG
NOSU-IOTB
TOTAL ALL BUILDINGS
A-4
BUILDING
FOOTPRINT SF
7,833
6,879
135
618
253
577
231
248
237
963
572
3,312
819
1,002
2,144
637
1,764
100,236
8,117
559,070
BUILDING SF
23,019
6,681
135
618
253
577
231
248
237
963
572
3,312
819
1,002
2,144
637
1,764
191040
8,117
777,778
Campus Master Plan
Appendix A
Sector C – Core Campus
Sector C: Area Summary
Multi-Purpose
Academic
Research
Library
Support Services
Housing
Parking
6,863,033 sf
157.55 acres
4,654,719 sf
Primary Function
Sector Area
Sector Acreage
Existing/ Approved Development
Existing Impervious Surface
Existing OSU
Public Street
Total Existing Impervious Surface
Percent Impervious Surface
Future Development
Total Development
2,,825,042 sf
57,060 sf
2,882,102 sf
41.9%
750,000 sf
5,404,719 sf
Minimum Open Space Required
25%
sf = square feet
Sector C: Existing Building and Coverage Detail
BLDG NO.
0001
0002
0003
0006
0007
0009
0011
0012
0014
0015
0016
0017
0018
0019
0020
0021
BUILDING NAME
APPERSON HALL
MERRYFIELD HALL
KELLEY ENGINEERING CENTER
GRAF HALL
COVELL HALL
BATCHELLER HALL
DEARBORN HALL
GILBERT HALL ADDITION
SHEPARD HALL
GILBERT HALL
GLEESON HALL (Chem Engr)
WENIGER HALL
BEXELL HALL
ROGERS HALL
MILNE COMPUTER CENTER
NASH HALL
Campus Master Plan
BUILDING
FOOTPRINT SF
10,493
22,672
42,759
14,062
11,556
6,159
18,027
9,435
4,908
20,519
9,068
38,187
15,842
13,583
13,224
16,816
BUILDING SF
29,426
27,329
153,057
37,792
37,329
20,816
64,455
44,144
11,673
83,148
39,011
211,077
58,600
55,341
23,502
105,456
A-5
Appendix A
BLDG NO.
BUILDING NAME
0022
0027
0028
0029
0030
0033
0034
0036
0037
0038
0041
0042
0043
0044
0045
0046
0047
0048
0049
0050
0051
0052
0053
0054
0055
0056
0061
0062
0067
0068
0069
0070
0073
0074
0075
0079
0081
0082
0083
0084
0086
0087
0091
0092
0096
OWEN HALL
BENTON HALL
EDUCATION HALL
BENTON ANNEX (Women's Center)
PHARMACY
GLADYS VALLEY GYMNASTICS CENTER
KIDDER HALL
THE VALLEY LIBRARY
GILKEY HALL
STRAND AGRICULTURE HALL
TENNIS COURT STORAGE
PHYSICAL PLANT-LUBE BLDG
PHYSICAL PLANT -VEHICLE SHED A
PHYSICAL PLANT-VEHICLE SHED B
PARKING SERVICES BUILDING
PHYSICAL PLANT SHOPS
PHYSICAL PLANT VEHICLE SHED
KEY SHOP
PHYSICAL PLANT - FREIGHT
PHYSICAL PLANT MATERIAL SHED
PHYSICAL PLANT - PAINT
PHYSICAL PLANT STORES
McALEXANDER FIELD HOUSE
INDOOR TARGET RANGE
PHYSICAL PLANT WAREHOUSE
PHYSICAL PLANT HEATING PLANT
KERR ADMINISTRATION BLDG
PLAGEMAN STUDENT HEALTH CR
BALLARD EXTENSION HALL
BURT HALL
BATES HALL (FAMILY STUDY CENTER)
WILKINSON HALL/GILFILLAN AUD
CORDLEY HALL
EAST GREENHOUSE
WITHYCOMBE HALL
AG LIFE SCIENCES
MILAM HALL
FAIRBANKS ANNEX
MEMORIAL UNION BLDG
GILMORE HALL
WOMENS BUILDING
FAIRBANKS HALL
GILMORE ANNEX
HOVLAND HALL
SACKETT HALL
A-6
BUILDING
FOOTPRINT SF
16,135
8,803
11,292
1,669
11,518
9,707
21,031
55,998
8,355
32,647
0
499
3,094
1,218
6,880
16,100
1,836
1,435
2,537
2,558
4,013
17,285
43,706
3,366
6,574
16,183
31,363
10,259
13,635
30,054
9,944
23,817
51,007
28,480
36,774
39,667
30,848
3,215
56,896
8,939
36,225
8,897
3,374
6,144
44,089
BUILDING SF
63,167
24,144
40,032
3,362
41,374
20,250
76,008
342,000
21,819
115,991
80
564
2,900
2,900
6,774
32,000
1,800
1,200
1,200
2,400
3,800
29,520
57,713
4,174
6,560
26,192
139,078
31,419
46,011
54,909
17,588
60,635
236,227
32,341
80,368
182,437
109,698
2,040
303,512
16,188
87,486
37,946
5,551
15,364
142,272
Campus Master Plan
Appendix A
BLDG NO.
BUILDING NAME
0100
0102
0103
0105
0106
0107
0108
0109
0111
0112
0113
0114
0115
0116
0117
0118
0119
0126
0127
0145
0146
0199
0807
0817
0827
0834
IOTB-242
IOTB-315
IOTB-201
IOTB-117
IOTB-116
IOTB-115
IOTB-49
IOTB-213
IOTB-214
IOTB-215
IOTB-39
IOTB-74
IOTB-41
IOTB-119
IOTB-111
IOTB-262
IOTB-260
SNELL HALL/MU EAST
WALDO HALL
FILTERING PLANT (LANGTON)
LANGTON HALL
MORELAND HALL
NATIVE AMERICAN LONGHOUSE
GOSS STADIUM
WEATHERFORD HALL
BUXTON HALL
POLING HALL
WEST DINING HALL
CAUTHORN HALL
WEST HALL
HECKERT LODGE
NAVY ROTC ARMORY
REED LODGE
HAWLEY HALL
GOSS STADIUM MAINTENANCE BLDG
TENNIS COURT
DIXON RECREATION CENTER
BELL TOWER
COLLEGE INN
OCEAN ADMINISTRATION BLDG
DAWES HOUSE
ASIAN and PACIFIC CULTURAL CENTER
BLACK CULTURAL CENTER
Campus Master Plan
BUILDING
FOOTPRINT SF
BUILDING SF
43,028
19,795
1,764
107,213
73,704
2,722
39,419
10,352
2,144
13,651
26,410
13,067
11,719
28,979
11,678
9,020
6,076
10,289
5,763
10,956
561
28,057
96,947
574
15,287
5,656
1,692
1,402
1,179
227
315
601
201
148
125
1,078
12
28
12
113
328
322
126
305
108
476
96,322
28,380
2,408
17,000
105,090
61,488
57,658
28,749
58,397
62,270
13,893
13,664
13,628
58,558
522
28,800
150,974
545
120,000
8,283
2,943
2,395
2,098
227
315
601
201
148
125
1,078
12
28
12
113
328
322
126
305
108
476
A-7
Appendix A
IOTB-200
IOTB-150
IOTB-261
IOTB-241
IOTB-203
TOTAL ALL BUILDINGS
A-8
420
184
326
75
335
1,466,706
420
184
326
75
335
4,654,719
Campus Master Plan
Appendix A
Sector D – Lower Campus
Sector D: Area Summary
Primary Function
Sector Area
Sector Acreage
Existing/ Approved Development
Existing Impervious Surface
Existing OSU
Existing Non OSU
Total Existing Impervious Surface
Percent Impervious Surface
Future Development
Total Development
Open Space
Housing
Welcome Center
Parking
President’s Residence
1,953,994 sf
44.86 acres
325,331 sf
569,091 sf
103,905 sf
672,996 sf
34.4%
35,000 sf
360,331 sf
Minimum Open Space Required
40%
sf = square feet
Sector D: Existing Building and Coverage Detail
BLDG NO.
0026
0032
0188
0190
0191
0192
0193
0194
0195
0220
0860
0862
IOTB-347
IOTB-346
IOTB-236
IOTB121
IOTB-120
BUILDING NAME
AZALEA HOUSE
CAMPUS ENTRANCE STATION
CHILD CARE CENTER
McNARY HALL
WILSON HALL
CALLAHAN HALL
McNARY DINING HALL
AVERY HOUSE
DIXON HOUSE
OXFORD HOUSE
SUNFLOWER HOUSE- KANE T 128 S 9TH ST
PROPERTY SERVICES
TOTAL ALL BUILDINGS
Campus Master Plan
BUILDING
FOOTPRINT SF
6,624
159
13,942
12,275
12,589
12,246
23,816
7,189
8,543
3,577
3,311
13,346
105
105
1,375
645
323
120,170
BUILDING SF
10,912
70
11,735
72,594
73,105
72,698
32,677
12,299
11,514
9,554
3,620
12,000
105
105
1,375
645
323
325,331
A-9
Appendix A
Sector E – Southwest Campus
Sector E: Area Summary
Primary Function
Academic
Research
Support Services
Agricultural
2,870,819 sf
65.90 acres
256,918 sf
Sector Area
Sector Acreage
Existing/ Approved Development
Existing Impervious Surface
Existing OSU
Public Street
Total Existing Impervious Surface
Percent Impervious Surface
Future Development
Total Development
504,416 sf
30,977 sf
535,393 sf
18.6%
120,000 sf
376,918 sf
Minimum Open Space Required
40%
sf = square feet
Sector E: Existing Building and Coverage Detail
BLDG NO.
0097
0153
0155
0172
0173
0175
0176
0177
0178
0180
0540
0542
0543
0544
0545
0546
0547
0549
A-10
BUILDING NAME
HOUSING SVC BLDG (FOOD SVC)
MAGRUDER HALL
VET HORSE BARN (POLE BLDG)
OCEANOGRAPHY STAGING BLDG (CYCL.)
AERO ENGINEERING LAB
ENTOMOLOGY MACHINE STORAGE
FUMIGATORIUM & SHOP
DUST MIXING-MACHINE STORAG
APIARY (BEE) BLDG
NURSERY STORAGE
F R L GREENHOUSE
F R L GARAGE & WAREHOUSE
F R L WAREHOUSE
F R L INSECTARY
OAK CREEK BUILDING
F R L SOLVENT SHED
F R L LUMBER STORAGE
FORESTRY GREENHOUSE – OC COMPLEX
BUILDING
FOOTPRINT SF
17,153
70,321
6,182
3,676
3,679
3,051
1,373
981
1,217
590
3,329
10,217
3,299
552
44,599
671
3,411
5,516
BUILDING SF
15,640
103,976
4,320
3,482
3,277
2,400
1,382
826
3,031
384
2,158
11,200
2,836
384
51,998
360
2,184
5,520
Campus Master Plan
Appendix A
BLDG NO.
BUILDING NAME
0865
IOTB-330
IOTB-329
IOTB-44
IOTB-146
IOTB-328
IOTB-327
IOTB-326
IOTB-53
IOTB-52
IOTB-54
IOTB-65
IOTB-56
IOTB-55
IOTB-57
IOTB-333
IOTB-344
OSU FOUNDATION CENTER
TOTAL ALL BUILDINGS
Campus Master Plan
BUILDING
FOOTPRINT SF
29,682
2,335
2,299
192
300
153
112
227
147
862
960
144
144
144
1,000
683
1,158
220,359
BUILDING SF
30,700
2,335
2,299
192
300
153
112
227
147
862
960
144
144
144
1,000
683
1,158
256,918
A-11
Appendix A
Sector F – Southwest Campus
Sector F: Area Summary
Primary Function
Academic
Research
Support Services
Agricultural
2,062,341 sf
47.34 acres
463,088 sf
Sector Area
Sector Acreage
Existing/ Approved Development
Existing Impervious Surface
Existing OSU
Existing Non OSU
Total Existing Impervious Surface
Percent Impervious Surface
Future Development
Total Development
1,301,965 sf
408 sf
1,302,373 sf
63.1%
750,000 sf
1,213,088 sf
Minimum Open Space Required
20%
sf = square feet
Sector F: Existing Building and Coverage Detail
BLDG NO.
0120
0121
0125
0142
0143
0221
0222
0223
0224
0225
0226
0227
IOTB-157
IOTB-162
BUILDING NAME
RESER STADIUM
GILL COLISEUM
STADIUM TICKET BOOTHS (4)
MERRIT TRUAX INDOOR PRACTICE CENTER
VALLEY FOOTBALL CENTER
OCEANOGRAPHY SHOP BLDG
OCEANOGRAPHY GEOPHYSICS
OCEANOGRAPHY CORE LAB
OCEANOGRAPHY WAREHOUSE
OCEANOGRAPHY LAB #5
OCEANOGRAPHY LAB, PHYSICAL
OCEANOGRAPHY BUOY LAB
TOTAL ALL BUILDINGS
BUILDING
FOOTPRINT SF
345,651
77,563
1,485
86,190
18,219
5,882
3,124
4,738
3,140
3,118
3,087
3,023
564
1,145
353,660
BUILDING SF
84,163
218,262
1,397
84,825
52,316
5,216
2,400
3,200
2,400
2,400
2,400
2,400
564
1,145
463,088
sf = square feet
A-12
Campus Master Plan
Appendix A
Sector G – Southwest Campus
Sector G: Area Summary
Primary Function
Housing
Conference
Support Services
Parking
1,360,414 sf
31.23 acres
746,023 sf
Sector Area
Sector Acreage
Existing/ Approved Development
Existing Impervious Surface
Existing OSU
Public Street
Total Existing Impervious Surface
Percent Impervious Surface
Future Development
Total Development
504,805 sf
59,146 sf
563,950 sf
41.4%
350,000 sf
1,309,973 sf
Minimum Open Space Required
40%
sf = square feet
Sector G: Existing Building and Coverage Detail
BLDG NO.
0058
0059
0060
0196
0197
0198
0200
0201
0204
0205
0814
0839
0853
IOTB-196
IOTB-197
IOTB-38
IOTB-247
BUILDING NAME
CASCADE HALL
INDUSTRIAL BLDG ANNEX
ADAMS HALL (Physical Plant)
FINLEY HALL
ARNOLD CAFETERIA
BLOSS HALL
LASELLS STEWART CENTER
CH2M HILL ALUMNI CENTER
CARRIE HALSELL RESIDENCE HALL
OSU PARKING STRUCTURE 1
CENTRO CULTURAL CE'SAR CHA'VEZ
CUSTOMER SERVICES BLDG
ADAMS ANNEX
TOTAL ALL BUILDINGS
Campus Master Plan
BUILDING
FOOTPRINT SF
29,193
3,404
6,232
11,707
26,369
10,535
38,202
33,493
19,236
86,140
1,224
1,206
1,590
2,354
975
324
278
272,462
BUILDING SF
39,320
3,240
11,573
84,751
29,500
84,755
43,211
45,000
72,254
324,437
516
1,660
1,875
2,354
975
324
278
746,023
A-13
Appendix A
Sector H – Far South Campus
Sector H: Area Summary
Primary Function
Sector Area
Sector Acreage
Existing/ Approved Development
Existing Impervious Surface
Existing OSU
Public Street
Total Existing Impervious Surface
Percent Impervious Surface
Future Development
Total Development
Athletics
Parking
Hilton Garden Inn
1,030,317 sf
23.65 acres
126, 921 sf
242,236 sf
73,764 sf
316,000 sf
30.6%
50,000 sf
176,921
Minimum Open Space Required
60%
sf = square feet
Sector H: Existing Building and Coverage Detail
BLDG NO. BUILDING NAME
147
SOFTBALL RESTROOM
IOTB-208
IOTB-206
NOSU-BLDG
NOSU-IOTB
TOTAL ALL BUILDINGS
A-14
BUILDING
FOOTPRINT SF
976
6,534
4,838
25,878
1,226
39,452
BUILDING SF
976
6,534
4,838
113,347
1,226
126,921
Campus Master Plan
Appendix A
Sector J – South Farm
Sector J: Area Summary
Primary Function
Sector Area
Sector Acreage
Existing/ Approved Development
Existing Impervious Surface
Existing OSU
Public Street
Total Existing Impervious Surface
Percent Impervious Surface
Future Development
Total Development
Research
Housing
Agricultural
Open Space
2,276,565 sf
52.36 acres
37,463 sf
37,878 sf
0 sf
37,878 sf
1.6%
350,000 sf
387,463 sf
Minimum Open Space Required
70%
sf = square feet
Sector J: Existing Building and Coverage Detail
BLDG NO.
0401
0403
0404
0405
0406
0407
0408
0409
0410
0411
0421
0422
0426
0427
0428
IOTB-15
IOTB-162
BUILDING NAME
SF RESIDENCE
SF POULTRY CAGE LAYER HOUSE
SF POULTRY CAGE LAYER HOUSE
SF POULTRY CAGE LAYER HOUSE
SF POOULTRY FARM STORAGE SHED
SF POULTRY BROODER HOUSE 551
SF POULTRY BROODER HOUSE 552
SF POULTRY BROODER HOUSE 553
SF POULTRY BROODER HOUSE 554
SF POULTRY BROODER HOUSE 500
FF RESIDENCE
FF STORAGE SHED
MINK FARM
MINK FARM CAGES
MINK FARM RES LAB
Campus Master Plan
BUILDING
FOOTPRINT SF
1,565
7,971
4,954
500
2,006
981
996
1,013
992
1,986
1,247
405
504
9,509
2118
363
380
BUILDING SF
1,980
7,971
3,744
346
2,006
996
981
1,013
992
1,986
1,761
405
504
9,509
2,118
363
380
A-15
Appendix A
56
144
98
22
44
IOTB-0
IOTB-1
IOTB-81
IOTB-5
IOTB-3
BLDG NO.
IOTB-4
BUILDING NAME
TOTAL ALL BUILDINGS
A-16
BUILDING
FOOTPRINT SF
44
37,898
56
144
98
22
44
BUILDING SF
44
37,463
Campus Master Plan
CAMPUS MASTER PLAN
2004-2015
Appendix B – Scaled Sector Map
Appendix B
Campus Master Plan
B-1
Appendix B
B-2
Campus Master Plan
CAMPUS MASTER PLAN
2004-2015
Appendix C – Neighborhood Traffic and
Parking Task Force
Appendix C
Neighborhood Traffic and Parking Task Force
Background
The City, OSU, and the neighborhood associations in the vicinity of OSU have acknowledged
that there are measured existing traffic and parking volume issues in specific areas of the
adjacent neighborhoods caused mainly by “cut-through” traffic and student/faculty parking. An
example of such is the traffic volumes on Jackson Avenue between 30th Street and Arnold Way.
As measured in recent years by City Staff, volumes exceed the design guidelines for local street
volumes and the street functions in some ways as a “local connector” or “collector.” Parking
surveys performed by OSU in conjunction with neighborhood representatives indicate that peak
parking in the College Hill neighborhood nearest the campus sometimes exceeds 100% of
capacity.
These conditions were identified as requiring solution if the OSU Campus Master Plan were to
receive support from the nearby neighborhoods. The Planning Commission decision responded
to these neighborhoods’ concerns regarding the impacts of OSU-related development over the
last several years by recommending to the City Council additional monitoring of effects and the
creation of a task force to identify appropriate responses to such effects.
OSU met with the neighborhood following this decision, and through a collaborative process, a
revised proposal regarding monitoring efforts and the task force was presented to the City
Council as a joint recommendation. To address these issues, OSU supported the creation of the
Neighborhood Traffic and Parking Task Force as described below. With the adoption of the
OSU CMP and a revised Land Development Code Chapter 3.36- OSU(Oregon State University)
District, the City Council responded to this proposal by incorporating its elements into both the
CMP and the Land Development Code text, as appropriate.
Purpose Statement
The purpose of the Neighborhood Traffic and Parking Task Force (Task Force) is to measure,
assess, and monitor traffic and parking within the neighborhoods bordering OSU, along the
northern boundaries of sectors A, B, and C (e.g., Cedar Hurst, College Hill, and North College
Hill neighborhoods). This evaluation will be used to establish an understanding of how traffic
and parking dynamics within the neighborhoods impact the quality of life and integrity of the
neighborhood character.
The Task Force will present an implementation plan to reduce any traffic volumes found to be in
excess of the existing applicable street classification standards on streets as they were designed,
and to reduce parking utilization rates that are found to be in excess of appropriate standards.
Campus Master Plan
C-1
Appendix C
This task force is formed with the following assumptions:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
The Task Force is responsible to evaluate the traffic and parking conditions within the
general area from the western boundary of the Cedarhurst Neighborhood Association to
the eastern boundary of the North College Hill Neighborhood Association between
Harrison Boulevard to the north and the Oregon State University District boundary to the
south. This includes the College Hill Neighborhood Association.
Traffic and parking issues are related.
The long term integrity and character of the neighborhoods are at risk with increases in
traffic volume and parking utilization rates along the neighborhoods’ streets.
A collaborative effort among the City, OSU, and the community is required to effectively
and proactively mitigate any impact.
Both short-term solutions and long-term planning solutions are required to effectively
address the existing and potential future issues of traffic volume and parking utilization.
The Task Force will establish base standards for parking utilization based on a review of
applicable standards and benchmarks.
Oregon State University recognizes its role as a contributing factor regarding parking
utilization and traffic volume and distribution across neighborhoods within the study
area.
Oregon State University recognizes how important it is to protect and maintain the
neighborhood character of those neighborhoods within the study area.
Task Force Goals
1.
2.
3.
4.
Protect the integrity and character of the College Hill West Historic District.
Reduce traffic volumes and associated parking from OSU in the neighborhoods.
Develop short-term solutions and long-term strategies in accordance with the purpose
statement and assumptions.
Develop a Traffic and Parking Management Plan that incorporates and balances the needs
of the community, the City, and Oregon State University.
Issues for review
The following list describes some of the issues the Task Force will need to review. This is not a
complete list. It is expected that other items will be added to the list upon the review by the Task
Force.
1.
C-2
Traffic management into and across the neighborhood.
a.
Task Force shall review the existing travel patterns and volumes of traffic within
the study area.
b.
The Task Force shall measure the current operating volume levels and
parking utilization, and make use of existing City traffic measurements from
the past five years.
Campus Master Plan
Appendix C
c.
d.
The Task Force shall use the City of Corvallis Street classification system and
definitions outlined in the City of Corvallis Transportation System Plan to
determine if current operating volume levels are consistent with said street
classification system.
The Task Force may consider alternatives to current travel patterns for
possible redirection of “cut-through” traffic.
2.
Traffic Calming Measures
a.
The Task Force shall review a series of traffic calming measures to reduce the
speed and volume of traffic.
b.
The Task Force shall review the potential impact of such traffic calming measures
with a qualified consultant prior to acting on any recommendation or initiating
any implementation of said measures.
c.
The Task Force shall measure and monitor the impact of the implemented
measures and make additional adjustments as necessary, if the desired effect
is not achieved.
3.
Parking
a.
OSU will continue to complete its annual utilization study of the neighborhood
parking districts.
b.
Current methodology may be refined based on findings of the Task Force.
c.
All applicable policies and practices that may have an influence on the
parking utilization rates within the neighborhoods will be reviewed.
Initiation of Task Force
Corvallis City Council shall mandate the Task Force by directing the City Planning Staff to
initiate the following process.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
The Mayor shall solicit appropriate representatives from City Staff, OSU, Monroe
Avenue businesses, and the affected Neighborhood Associations.
The task force shall follow a standard protocol, similar to that used by the recent Harrison
Corridor Task Force.
The Task Force shall be initiated no later than six months following the approval of the
OSU Campus Master Plan by the City Council.
Once the Task Force has made its recommendations and they have been implemented, the
City, in conjunction with OSU and the neighborhoods, shall measure and monitor the
impact of the implementation at least on an annual basis. If the mitigation efforts are
unsuccessful, then the City shall reconvene the Task Force to review the ongoing issues
and make additional recommendations to address them.
The City and OSU agree that the Task Force support and the Task Force recommended
implementation and/or mitigation measures not identified in the OSU Transportation
Improvement Plan (TIP) shall be a shared responsibility between the City and OSU.
Campus Master Plan
C-3
CAMPUS MASTER PLAN
2004-2015
Appendix D – Oregon State University
neighborhood Charter Statement
Appendix D
Oregon State University
Neighborhood Charter Statement
Oregon State University is a major, comprehensive university. Its mission is determined by the
state government and is beyond the scope of the Campus Master Plan (CMP). The CMP focuses
on campus resources including buildings, transport systems, and parking facilities. These are
designed to serve the needs of students, faculty, other employees, and university visitors.
However, the campus is located in Corvallis where campus land use decisions impact the
adjacent neighbors and neighborhoods – in both positive and potentially negative ways.
This charter statement is an attempt to characterize how OSU hopes to interact with its
neighbors, adjacent to the borders of campus, when updating the Campus Master Plan. OSU will
use the planning approach it followed while developing the current CMP in 2004, when it
worked with the neighbors along its northern boundary in a cooperative and productive manner.
To this end, OSU fully expects that representatives from other adjacent neighborhoods are likely
to recognize their own concerns and to desire to be included.
The Charter consists of five basic parts: 1) a statement of purpose; 2) a description of
neighborhood participation; 3) a description of the desired relationship between OSU and its
neighbors; 4) an identification of likely considerations when the CMP is updated; and 5) an
outline of the planning assumptions for future CMP updates
1.
PURPOSE
The purpose of the Oregon State University Neighborhood Charter Statement (Charter) is to
encourage productive interactions between OSU and its adjacent neighbors when the CMP is
updated. The hope is that mutually-beneficial outcomes can be maximized and undesirable
outcomes can be minimized.
OSU would like to establish continuing relationships with all of the neighborhoods that border
the campus. The goals would be to achieve dialogue about each neighborhood’s concerns, to
address common interests, and to reduce conflicts.
2.
NEIGHBORHOOD PARTICIPATION
With the creation of the new CMP, OSU would like to try a new approach to neighborhood
participation in the planning process. This trial is envisioned for the period of the CMP as long
as it is productive. Participation will take several forms.
Campus Master Plan
D-1
Appendix D
a. Annual meetings
One venue for participation will be annual meetings hosted by the University. At these meetings
the University will 1) discuss campus plans for the next year, other plans that are in various
stages of development at the time, and all proposed CMP updates, 2) share data which the
University has gathered over the past year with regard to such topics as traffic, parking, green
space, etc., and 3) solicit, compile, and report feedback about neighborhood/campus concerns.
These meetings will help to encourage system-wide solutions, which incorporate the needs of all
adjacent neighborhoods, and at the same time, to take the surprise element out of the campus
planning process. Meetings will be open to the public. They will be announced in local media,
and invitations will be sent to all the adjacent neighborhood associations.
b. Neighborhood task forces
A second venue for participation will be neighborhood task forces. OSU plans to participate in
task forces, which include the University, the City, and representatives from the adjacent
neighborhoods. The reports of these task forces will be made public. The prototype task force
will be the Parking and Traffic Task Force, which was approved by the Corvallis Planning
Commission in 2004. If this task force can be successful, the task force approach will be
expanded to address other around-the-campus issues.
c. Review of final documents
A third venue for participation will be incorporated into the development process for CMP
updates. Before each update is completed, adjacent neighborhoods will be given an opportunity
to review final drafts. This form of peer review will improve and clarify the language of the
final output.
d. Campus committees
A fourth venue involves campus committees. Representatives of adjacent neighborhoods will
be allowed to join on the Campus Planning Committee and the Campus Parking Committee.
Committee meetings will be open to the public for observation purposes. Neighbors will be
notified about the times and locations of meetings.
e. Informal comments
The University will continue to receive compliments and complaints from neighbors at any time,
particularly through the Facilities Services Department. Simple problems can be dealt with
quickly as they arise. Larger problems will be directed toward the annual meeting, campus
committee, and task force venues.
D-2
Campus Master Plan
Appendix D
3.
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN OSU AND ITS NEIGHBORS
OSU and the neighbors used the final stages of the CMP development process as a new
beginning in their relationship. Neighbors participated in the 2004-2015 Campus Master Plan to
a much greater level than in previous planning documents. Their efforts and commitment have
provided OSU with a deeper understanding about their concerns over potential OSU
development and its impact on: existing neighborhood character, land use equity, traffic and
parking, solar access, building scale, mass and height, historic preservation, etc. CMP updates
shall, at a minimum, review these concerns with the community to determine if additional
mitigation measures are necessary. If OSU and the neighbors determine additional measures are
required to ensure OSU development meets the spirit of the 2004-2015 CMP and this Charter,
then such measures shall be included.
OSU and the neighbors developed the foundations for respect, effective communication, trust,
equity, and cooperation during the completion of the 2004-2015 CMP. As such, these are the
tenets of the relationship between the neighbors and OSU for CMP updates. The goal of these
tenets is to establish a system and structure for future relations so that the work and efforts of the
current OSU staff and neighbors will be carried on through the years.
a. Respect
Representatives of OSU and its neighbors should a place high enough value on what the “other
side” is concerned about to listen and understand. They all should answer questions in a
straightforward manner, and attempt to seek mutually beneficial solutions. When compromise
seems impossible, they should – very respectfully – agree to disagree.
b. Communication
OSU and its neighbors should engage in a dialogue during the preparation of CMP updates, both
listening and explaining. Between now and any future CMP updates, OSU and neighbors will
already have had formal and informal meetings to discuss matters of concern with the intent of
forming clear and objective methods to address these concerns.
c. Trust
OSU and the neighbors should strive to ensure that the trust established through the efforts of
preparing the 2004-2015 Campus Master Plan are safeguarded during any update. All parties
must recognize that in order to sustain the trust over the years all parties must continue to be
truthful and make good faith efforts to follow through.
Campus Master Plan
D-3
Appendix D
d. Equity
For the purposes of this Charter, equity is defined as a high standard or value of property beyond
that of ownership. Each party will respect one another’s property and the need to safeguard its
function, value, and livability as if it were their own. No need of one will automatically cancel
the other without a fair and just (i.e., balanced, honest, open-minded, and straightforward)
discussion of impact. If future impact of development, preservation, or protection of certain
tangible and intangible uses or functions of one’s property is determined to occur then each party
will agree to review options that either minimize or remove such impact.
Future CMP updates will ensure land use planning efforts on campus are consistent with the
merits of the definition of equity used herein. OSU agrees to safeguard needs of resident
homeowners; the neighbors desire to have privacy, minimal impact from development that might
lower the value of their property, change the character of their neighborhood, or decrease the
livability of their community. The neighbors agree to hold to a high standard OSU’s mission as
a University and its desires to become a top-tier university. OSU’s need to provide the most upto-date facilities to provide a compelling learning environment will be safeguarded.
As such, it is paramount that factors such as parking, traffic, building heights, setbacks, solar
access, architectural features, historic preservation, open space conservation, and natural
resource conservation are addressed.
e. Cooperation
OSU and the neighbors will proactively cooperate to address all matters of concern in CMP
updates. During the completion of the 2004-2015 CMP, both OSU and the neighbors focused on
building a system and process for effective and long lasting communication, trust and equity.
Both sides recognized that if a strong planning system and structure is in place that incorporates
the needs of each party, then the desired product will be achieved.
f.
Partnership
In the past, some neighborhoods have perceived the University to be an “800-pound gorilla.” To
a greater extent than ever before, OSU envisions a process involving full partners. The expected
benefits include: saving time and resources, more supportive joint efforts, and better planning
outcomes.
g.
Representative neighborhood inputs
It is important that the inputs from each neighborhood are representative of the concerns of the
neighborhood as whole – rather than of specific individuals. A simple way of conceptualizing
neighborhood participation would be to involve neighborhood associations, from adjacent
neighborhoods, that are recognized by the City of Corvallis.
D-4
Campus Master Plan
Appendix D
4.
COMMON CONCERNS WHEN THE CMP IS UPDATED
a. Character of adjacent neighborhoods:
When preparing CMP updates, OSU and adjacent neighbors will discuss the aspects of existing
neighborhood character and develop measures and polices to protect such aspects in accordance
with this Charter. Maintaining the “graceful edge” is a common goal because it benefits all
parties.
b. Traffic and parking
Traffic and parking are interrelated in land use planning and design. The integrity and character
of land uses are often impacted by traffic conditions, street design, parking utilization, and traffic
management. All of these facets of traffic and parking will be reviewed and discussed with
adjacent neighbors during the preparation of CMP updates. Aspects appropriate to review may
include, but not be limited to, traffic flow across neighborhoods, parking utilization rates within
neighborhoods, and impacts on existing neighborhood character, especially for those
neighborhoods designated as historic districts, such as the College Hill West Historic District.
This Charter recognizes the importance of the Neighborhood Traffic and Parking Task Force.
OSU and the neighbors will seek its input (as well as other City approved traffic and parking task
forces) when preparing future updates to the CMP.
c. Historic resources
Both the neighbors and OSU recognize the importance of the historic resources on campus and
the need to protect those resources that are potentially historic. The neighbors understand that
OSU will operate with a good faith effort in the future to protect such resources. The neighbors
also recognize that OSU needs to balance the preservation of buildings with the need to meet
current building and fire codes, energy conservation guidelines, fiscal constraints, and adapting
these resources to current needs of academic and research initiatives that require building
infrastructure (e.g., media communications, teaching laboratories), that were not originally
designed as part of the building.
Future CMP updates will include a review of the current Historic Preservation Plan, and if
necessary, OSU shall update it to ensure the policies and measures within the preservation plan
adequately address current day circumstances.
d. Natural Resources
OSU’s property contains natural resources (e.g., wetlands, riparian areas) that have been found to
be significant by the City of Corvallis. As such, OSU recognizes the importance of its role as a
steward of these resources.
Campus Master Plan
D-5
Appendix D
5. ASSUMPTIONS FOR FUTURE CMP UPDATES
This Charter for updates to the Campus Master Plan is based on a number of planning
assumptions, which will be made explicit here.
a. OSU will have an on-going relationship with the adjacent neighborhoods.
b. OSU will seek the participation of its neighbors.
c. OSU has an important role as an institution of higher education within the State of
Oregon with the primary need to support academic, research and service initiatives.
d. OSU will change and grow to fulfill its mission to the State of Oregon.
e. The best way to solve problems is to take a systems approach, which would meld
University and neighborhood interfaces to common purposes.
f. Systems thinking also requires that traffic and parking issues are interrelated and must be
evaluated together.
g. Requirements for the “graceful edge,” or transition area between campus and surrounding
neighborhoods, will be reviewed whenever the CMP is updated.
h. In the planning process, benchmark data from other communities similar to
OSU/Corvallis will be sought when resolution of opposing positions is in need of an
objective standard.
i. The input of the Neighborhood Traffic and Parking Task Force, and other City-approved
agencies will be recognized.
j. The whole point of the new process identified in this Charter is to prevent disagreement
between OSU and its neighbors; however, disagreements can still be appealed through
University and City of Corvallis processes.
D-6
Campus Master Plan